In the chilling realm of Elsengard, Ragnvald emerged, a towering paladin
born amidst blizzards and thunderous storms. From a young age, he was
chosen by the ancient order of Frostguard Paladins, known for their
unyielding dedication to protecting their land and people.
In the outskirts of Elsengard stands a towering obsidian spire. In it
dwells a dark sorcerer known only as Malgrim the Malevolent. His mastery
over the dark arts surpassed all known sorcery in Elsengard. From his
shadowy stronghold, Malgrim raised an army of undead and shadow warriors,
raiding the peaceful lands of Elsengard. The only force standing between
Malgrim and domination was the ancient order - the Forstguard Paladins.
The tussle between Light and Dark raged on across the plains of Elsengard.
Shadow warriors and paladins fell to be reborned as undead soldiers and in
turn purified by the ancient order. Ultimately, the fight between the Light
and Dark forces came to a climatic showdown in the Plains of Verdantia, some
thirty miles west of Thronheim, the capital city of Elsengard. Ragnvald
stared over the plains, eyes locked onto a lone figure draped in black robes
swirling in the wind. That is my target...
A long blast of horn sounded and the thundering roar of hooves clattering
across the grass rang across the battlefield. Looking through the thin slit
of his visor, he saw the distance closing and readied his lance, braced for
impact. The first wave of knights clashed into the frontline.
A step to the left, a slash to the right. Ragnvald slashed his way across
the lines of shadow warriors in his path. His prize is within his reach. A
sword to the heart and an end to the war. Malgrim glanced into the eyes of
Ragnvald, his dark eyes laughing at the other's futility and smiled, his
decaying teeth showing under his dried lips. With a sharp turn, Malgrim
fled, disappearing behind a large boulder and into the darkness. Ragnvald
roared and shoved aside everyone standing in his way, following the trail
into the darkness.
Malgrim stood before a wooden pedestal made of vines. A shimmering ball
could be seen illuminating the center of a small clearing. Ragnvald strode
forward with confident steps, knowing the end is near. Malgrim smiled and
started chanting, braiding his thin fingers into weird symbols. Ragnvald
narrowed his eyes, sensing something amiss he charged forward, sword in his
hands. Malgrim yelled "Begone foolish one. With you gone, the world will
be mine!" . A large portal shimmered into existence pulling Ragnvald into
it. No, this must not end like this. As Ragnvald struggled agains the
force pulling him into the portal, he stretched out his hand and grabbed
Malgrim. Looking at him, Ragnvald said "If I go, you will be coming with
me." With that said, he launched himself into the portal, pulling Malgrim
along. Everything faded into darkness.
Ragvald opened his eyes, large trees loomed over him. A sign that said
Welcome to Braem wood could be seen. Where is this place, Ragnvald thought
to himself. Thinking to himself, nothing matters, his quest for Malgrim
continues. He lurks somewhere in this place...
Description:
A Jotun paladin stands tall and formidable, reaching heights of ten feet,
his stature commanding attention. His physique boasts impressive strength,
a chiseled frame adorned with ancient symbols that gleam with an ethereal
frost. His skin, resembling polished marble with a frosty sheen, bears
swirling patterns reminiscent of frozen windswept landscapes. Piercing,
glacier-blue eyes radiate an unwavering resolve, framed by a face adorned
with frost-kissed features that carry an air of stoic determination.
Cascading silvery-white hair, meticulously braided and often adorned with
crystalline fragments, flows like a frozen waterfall down their broad
shoulders.
A worthy adversary. Always knew I was up for a tough battle whenever this one came around. A shame I could never secure the kill… and I’m sure the feeling was mutual.
Hi all. Thanks for the good comments. Honestly, i don't think i played the jotun paladin to the best of its potential. Made lots of mistakes.
I enjoyed playing a knight paladin a lot, but i didn't agree with the current knight policies. You can literally replace knights with the warlord and replace challenge with crusade. Maybe even more restrictive then warlords.
On to my next. I'm sure the other knights will do well.
Elyr, you've been doing good. Being the most senior knight I'm sure you'll do well.
Fighting you was a challenge, and its all about timing on both sides. Had you used avenging angel right when you used iron will and I failed hobble you would have smoked me. I was surprised you didn't use it, but I think you followed the RP on when and how exceptionally.
Obsidian vuln was really disappointing and didn't seem to make much of a difference at all. I get the reduced healing part, but I'd rather see capital damage.
I did find it odd the Knights who aren't chaotic can't invade on a Justice, that would bring some interesting flavor to this, but Crusade would really be interesting if it can somehow restrict the area for both involved.
Especially if these unwritten rules regarding corpse looting will be adhered to where you lose 1 or 2 items max makes for much more exciting fights with a conclusion without a devastating ending.
Dogran
1 , 0 , 0 .
I'm curious about what points you don't like about knights. I'm sure several of us are, as we are all interested in making sure the game is fun for everyone. If it's sensitive info feel free to post in ask an immortal.
Nothing sensitive. I can share my thoughts if you guys are interested.
For the knight cabal:
1. Why are the knights required to obey other town's laws. That's really stupid. Why would the valour knights care about the laws of justice protecting seringale and timaran.
2. I wanted to RP as a knight that fights and destroys all evils. If I'm outnumbered and i think i have a chance to win I'll take it. That's why i fought thelrin and the other legion together. On the reverse, i was going to gank other evils. I sent a note for the knights to kill gulgru outside of town. If we have to obey seringale's law, the only way to purge gulgru was to make sure he doesn't make it back to town. But ceridwel stopped me. He said to fight honorably with gulgru. What are we now, Warlords?
3. Then i got very frustrated that gulgru got away from me because i had to cut him offf running back to seringale. He makes it back to seringale I'm not allowed to take a flag to finish him. I was so pissed and frustrated with that.
4. The last straw was telling me offline capping of cabal item is dishonorable. Like... i was expected to fight gulgru inside his cabal and burn through tens of thousands hp of guardians to seize his cabal item alone? It's not possible, that's the same as telling me no capturing of cabal item. The question was why? We're worse than warlords.
5. Intruding justice gets intruder. Killing justice with intruder gets wanted. Intruding knights, nothing. Killing knights, nothing. According to asara, killing one noble doesnt give anathema. Probably need a few kills like a tier level. How many nobles are there? There's only lirael who is seeking a pardon and ansel who broke his oath by becoming vessel. Ansel is seen 5mins a month to keep himself from inactive delete. So, anathema is non existent.
Class specific
1. Avenging angel requiring RP requirement to use is quite a turn off honestly. It's not really that strong anymore. Imagine after fulfilling the rp requirements for avenging angel, use avenging angel and the warrior dirts you. Flee and avenging angel fades because it lasts 2 hours and such a long cooldown.
2. The lack of aoe is another turn off. Radiance the only aoe requiring 24hr cooldown. Most of the time i wont be bothered chasing thieves. Waste of time.
Just to add, I'm not saying ceridwel's way of running the cabal is wrong. That's his cabal guidelines and that's how he wants the cabal to be.
For me, i wanted to be a knight that is somewhat extremist. Honorable to friends (neutral and good aligned) but out to destroy evil using all means. So yeah, our ideas just dont align, so I'm out. Cheers.
ivindel
0 , 0 , 0 .
For me, a situation describing an opponent playing against a Justice will always favor the opponent and I think it's designed to be like that. The Justice has to obey the laws if he chooses to PK, so both the Justice and the opponent have the option to "run" to town for safety, but the opponent will always have the added advantage of choosing to take the flag to secure the kill if the Justice somehow has the wrong sense of security that he will always be safe back in town.
Also, the intruder flag can be paid off easily and it doesn't cause much and it is written in the intruder helpfile that there are no longstanding repercussions for being an intruder at all. Generally speaking, if you want to kill a Justice, be ready to take the flag for it because the downside is that the Justice is duty bound to the laws of town and his opponent will always have safe haven in town.
Davairus
0 , 0 , 0 .
Ragnvald you seem to have that misunderstood. As a Knight you are a well-intentioned extremist, somebody who takes things way too far. We all know this. If you have some evil Justice who is clearly being a bastard (which means he's been threatening people of Valour, or their friends, anywhere outside of following official Justice duties), thats breaking the Valour laws and the penalty is death for breaking the laws of Valour. Its death, no matter which of their laws you break. If it is a justice breaking the laws of Valour, the duty of the Knight cabal is to then start a crusade to liberate the city of Seringale. With holy gangbang of dooooom. The staggeringly out of proportional response is the hilarious point that has the evils laughing, because they recognize youre just as bad as they are, and just dont have any self-awareness of it. I'm not sure what Ceridwel is instructing these days , but I do know there have always been efforts to appease whiners. When I setup Valour I made it so that nobles could flag anathema and that everybody who was anathema was served a gangbang, and it worked out great, in my opinion. I mean, I got exactly the results I wanted. If they removed that, ah well, but watch and see if the laws of Valour are broken. The roll sheet thing is just to determine priority
I killed a noble or two and never got the anathema flag.
Ceridwel
0 , 0 , 0 .
Literally the first listed Virtue is Honor. It has been for the 20+ years I've been playing this game and nothing has changed in that regard. That Virtue states "He obeys other town's laws as his duty permits". This doesn't mean you can't break Justice laws of Seringale. If your Knight duties require you to attack someone in town then go for it. So that begs the question: how do you know when your Knight duties allow for breaking Seringale laws? Two easy ways: 1) your target is Anathema. 2) You're on a Crusade. Simple as that. This was communicated to you but if I didn't communicate it well then that's on me.
Same thing goes for knowing when is it ok to attack a target with any numbers necessary. When you ordered the Knights to attack someone (who was not Anathema at the time) with any numbers necessary (aka "gank") I *had* to step in to overrule that. Your intended target was not Anathema at the time. Knights were not at war with the target nor their cabal. And, I think you were Rank 3 at the time so shouldn't have been giving such broad orders to the cabal yet anyways. Had you been Executor I would not have stepped in like that - I would have pulled you aside and discussed one on one. Executors get a bit of leeway to run the cabal the way they want without me stepping in to supersede but a rank 3 does not.
Offline capping of cabal items was discussed at the game community level sometime in the last few years and was determined to be such a dick move (if not at war) that I couldn't rightly allow a Rank 4 to do it. I might give a Rank 1 or 2 a strong slap on the wrist for doing it but that's different than giving a Rank 4 verbal permission to go do it. The option I gave you was in line with the constraints of the Knights moral code: offer him the Oath and when he refused start a Crusade then go crazy.
Knights are not bloodthirsty zealots. There is a moral code (The Virtues) that governs their actions and give them direction for their existence. There *has* to be a philosophical delineator that separates Knights from Legion, and that separation is the Virtues. Honor, Courage, and Respect. If Knights gank a non-Anathema they are no better than Legion. If Knights offline cap a non-warring cabal item they are cowards. If you want to RP a good-aligned character who will stop at nothing to eradicate evil, play a non-caballed Eradicator Paladin; that’s what they were created for.
Currently Nobles cannot issue an Anathema flag. In fact, it was only a few years ago that I was able to convince Dav to give that power to Executor rank. What Nobles *can* do is pardon Anathema. And, the killing of Nobles is supposed to lead to eventually being flagged as Anathema. BUT - I have long suspected the code for flagging Anathema for killing Nobles is either broken or not strict enough. Ilromie got pasted across the streets of Valour a couple times and their killer didn't get flagged.
Anathema not working properly is what I see as the real issue here. Anathema is supposed to be the status that allows Knights to take their gauntlets off (or put them on?) and kick some ass in any numbers necessary and in any methods necessary. I'm going to work with Dav offline on the following:
1) Review the Anathema code to see why killing a Noble isn't auto-flagging. In my opinion, I want murdering a Noble even once to flag as Anathema. Murdering Valor citizens who are not Nobles should also lead to eventual Anathema. Other things could as well. Share ideas if you have them. Note: the roll sheet in Valour currently lists Anathemas in order of how drastic their Anathema status is and therefore who Knights should target first.
2) Beef up the various guard mobs in Valour to attack Anathemas with more rigor. Currently some guards won't even attack Anathema. Being Anathema while in Valour should be as much a pain in the ass as being Wanted in a protected town is.
3) Lower the rank requirement for the ability to flag Anathema from 5 to 4.
Please feel free to share any other ideas people have on making Anathema more weighty either here or in a note to me in game.
I would think that the anathema flag could also be applied if somebody is obviously disrespectful to Valour. Killing Zelbin and murdering a Noble who is sleeping inside should be instant anathema status if you ask me. To give another extreme example, if an evil starts treating the palace like they own it, that's another reason to be considered anathema. We had a duergar some time ago who decided to shit in the palace and sit on the throne - were it not for the fact that he died, I would consider actions like that also worthy of anathema status.
Obviously, breaking the oath is anathema, but the question becomes, how do you handle people who will not or cannot take the oath in the first place?
Dogran
0 , 0 , 0 .
I want to start with a thank you for sharing how it felt. I like the direction that Ceridwel wants to go with it. I have long felt that it was too hard to become anathema now, and ill let you know right now that I fought you across several towns and I enjoyed our fights. I have a hard time playing knights because I got too used to the freedom of being evil, and being able to murder the hoarder who has the gear I need. I also tend to play super edge of the line ruthless knights and that gets lots of complaints (not from ceridwel haha).
Biggest thing I want to say is good luck on you next... I have openings in legion hint hint.
lionSpyre
0 , 0 , 0 .
I just want to throw my support behind virtually everything Ceridwel said here. Conduct with Knights is always a sensitive topic, and boy is there a fine line between a White Knight and a maniacal zealot (especially because everyone has an opinion on it). However.. I can say this is one aspect of Knights I really enjoyed. Almost counterintuitively, a strict code of conduct can give you a lot of motivation and creativity for RP. So I strongly believe that part of the fun of being a Knight is navigating those morally-grey situations from the perspective of someone who is utterly convinced that they embody a truly righteous cause.
Re: anathema, 100% in full support. I remember messaging Ceridwel over the desire to anathema a thief who killed a noble inside the palace, based solely on the testimony of the noble. Ceridwel gave me the OK to pursue it as Executor, so I issued this very official letter to the thief (with Knights and Nobles cc'd) that they were accused of this crime and had a right to defend themselves. The thief wrote back pretty much telling me to fuck off, so I tagged him Anathema. Not sure how much the thief got out of that interaction RP-wise... but I can say it made Valour feel like a real place where actions against its citizens and nobility have real consequences.
Obeying the law unless other action is necessary was put in there to spare Knights having to get wanted and spanked on a regular basis. Ramrod and I used to stack Knight bodies to the ceiling when they were expected to give it their best go at us, back during the era of Taere and Devorast.
From what I saw Ragnvald did fine as a knight. Everyone has their own perspective on what a knight should be. Ragnvald was on the arrogant and aggressive side of that spectrum from my IC perspective(I was neutral at the time). My sense was frustration from lack of viable fights as Kryton was the main one available and mostly untenable in a 1 on 1. As a Jotun Paladin I could see several crusadable targets ducking your crusades. I wasn’t looking forward to the fight myself either. As an Executor I would denote all legions as anathema and go ham on them, especially the obviously skilled ones you had like Kryton, Zyron, and Kiki. As for breaking laws, you had a built in situation where it was required and I was a little disappointed you never caught a flag because at the end Gulgru was the personification of corrupt evil. I think Anathema can use a bit of a revamp because the active pbase isn’t such that there are enough nobles running around dying to get people flagged. Maybe a sliding scale where aggressive evils get made anathema after 5-10 pks on good aligned characters or something similar.
Maybe I am missing something, but what is the big deal about Anathema. If I am Anathema does that mean valour guards attack you like if you are wanted? Big deal I won't go to valour. And if I am Anathema that means Knights can HGOD ok big deal again, what is the likely hood that 3 knights log in when I log in.
lionSpyre
0 , 0 , 0 .
I think that’s why we’re discussing it here, Gulgru. Up until now, it has meant Knights can use superior numbers or “any means necessary” to take you down. Now, it’s being discussed as Valour’s equivalent to wanted.
lionSpyre
0 , 0 , 0 .
And I wouldn’t exactly dismiss “not going to Valour” as not a big deal. For example, I’m sure a Knight would feel much better about taking a flag to take you down if you had Anathema status. Because then, if the Knight is flagged, you would HAVE to go into Valour to get him.
But this is the stupid chicken or the egg discussion. I'm anathema he HAS to come kill me. So he takes a flag and immediately runs to Valour to force the fight in Valour and just waits for me to show up? Seems to be a lack of honor courage respect from my arm chair.
Bottomline was, i misunderstood ceridwel's intent. I thought i could only break the law if you are anathema. Didn't want a shitstorm coming my way for not following the first virtue.
Secondly, i wanted to draw you out of seringale by either 1, being wanted or 2 capping your item. When i couldn't do either i decided it was time to move on. That's about it.
Ragnvald I don’t think you misunderstood Ceridwel’s intent. I think the intent was not very clear to begin with (per helpfiles). I agree with everything you said earlier.
From the helpfiles it sounded very lame and counterintuitive. It actually sounds really boring to play.
Scrynor
0 , 0 , 0 .
Personally, I would love to see a Knight who pushes the line obey the code by operating in the gray. If you can't offline cap... discretely hire somebody else to do it. Just seems like there are lots of literally examples of the evil good guy entrenched in an high place in an organization but we don't often see the more evil leaning Knights behave like them. Perhaps roundabout methods are not appealing to the players who want to be an aggro Knight... but it would be cool to see.
1) Nobles have re-attained the ability to mark someone as Anathema for crimes against Valour befitting of such a status.
2) Knight's ability to mark someone Anathema has been dropped from Rank 5 to Rank 3.
3) Knights offline capping an enemy cabal item is allowed in some circumstances, such as when a member of the target cabal is Anathema. What I want to avoid is Knights capping items just to be dicks. There needs to be a solid RP reason for it.
4) Helpfiles will be updated to more clearly explain what "when duty allows" means, etc. Specifically, if chasing an Anathema or on a Crusade, all bets are off.
Let's try this for a while and see how it goes. We rely on your feedback to gauge whether changes help or hurt the game so please keep the feedback coming.
Dogran
0 , 0 , 0 .
That'd exciting, thanks Ceridwel I look forward to the mayhem.
Given enough time, The Light will birth another of this caliber. One can only hope; the gift of hope is what we will thank you for, Sir Ragnvald
[reply to Elyr]
Valour has lost one of its greatest champions of this time however, and somebody will have to step up. Who will it be?
Hotun 0 , 0 , 0 . Maybe Ceridwel or Lumubella?
Gulgru 0 , 0 , 0 . Was Ragnvald executor? These new titles are confusing Ceridwel 
0 , 0 , 0 . No. The Executor title has not changed.
[reply to Afales]Nice run Ragnvald, I thought there would be more kills/deaths. I saw on the stream that you fought a ton. Looking forward to your next character.
[reply to Zyron]
I enjoyed playing a knight paladin a lot, but i didn't agree with the current knight policies. You can literally replace knights with the warlord and replace challenge with crusade. Maybe even more restrictive then warlords.
On to my next. I'm sure the other knights will do well.
Elyr, you've been doing good. Being the most senior knight I'm sure you'll do well.
The other current knights, all the best.
Gulgru 0 , 0 , 0 . Fighting you was a challenge, and its all about timing on both sides. Had you used avenging angel right when you used iron will and I failed hobble you would have smoked me. I was surprised you didn't use it, but I think you followed the RP on when and how exceptionally.
Dogran 
1 , 0 , 0 . I'm curious about what points you don't like about knights. I'm sure several of us are, as we are all interested in making sure the game is fun for everyone. If it's sensitive info feel free to post in ask an immortal. Ragnvald 0 , 0 , 0 . Nothing sensitive. I can share my thoughts if you guys are interested.
Ragnvald 0 , 0 , 0 . Just to add, I'm not saying ceridwel's way of running the cabal is wrong. That's his cabal guidelines and that's how he wants the cabal to be.
ivindel 
0 , 0 , 0 . For me, a situation describing an opponent playing against a Justice will always favor the opponent and I think it's designed to be like that. The Justice has to obey the laws if he chooses to PK, so both the Justice and the opponent have the option to "run" to town for safety, but the opponent will always have the added advantage of choosing to take the flag to secure the kill if the Justice somehow has the wrong sense of security that he will always be safe back in town. Davairus 0 , 0 , 0 . Ragnvald you seem to have that misunderstood. As a Knight you are a well-intentioned extremist, somebody who takes things way too far. We all know this. If you have some evil Justice who is clearly being a bastard (which means he's been threatening people of Valour, or their friends, anywhere outside of following official Justice duties), thats breaking the Valour laws and the penalty is death for breaking the laws of Valour. Its death, no matter which of their laws you break. If it is a justice breaking the laws of Valour, the duty of the Knight cabal is to then start a crusade to liberate the city of Seringale. With holy gangbang of dooooom. The staggeringly out of proportional response is the hilarious point that has the evils laughing, because they recognize youre just as bad as they are, and just dont have any self-awareness of it. I'm not sure what Ceridwel is instructing these days , but I do know there have always been efforts to appease whiners. When I setup Valour I made it so that nobles could flag anathema and that everybody who was anathema was served a gangbang, and it worked out great, in my opinion. I mean, I got exactly the results I wanted. If they removed that, ah well, but watch and see if the laws of Valour are broken. The roll sheet thing is just to determine priority Kryton 0 , 0 , 0 . I killed a noble or two and never got the anathema flag. Ceridwel 
0 , 0 , 0 . Literally the first listed Virtue is Honor. It has been for the 20+ years I've been playing this game and nothing has changed in that regard. That Virtue states "He obeys other town's laws as his duty permits". This doesn't mean you can't break Justice laws of Seringale. If your Knight duties require you to attack someone in town then go for it. So that begs the question: how do you know when your Knight duties allow for breaking Seringale laws? Two easy ways: 1) your target is Anathema. 2) You're on a Crusade. Simple as that. This was communicated to you but if I didn't communicate it well then that's on me.
Afales 0 , 0 , 0 . I would think that the anathema flag could also be applied if somebody is obviously disrespectful to Valour. Killing Zelbin and murdering a Noble who is sleeping inside should be instant anathema status if you ask me. To give another extreme example, if an evil starts treating the palace like they own it, that's another reason to be considered anathema. We had a duergar some time ago who decided to shit in the palace and sit on the throne - were it not for the fact that he died, I would consider actions like that also worthy of anathema status.
Dogran 
0 , 0 , 0 . I want to start with a thank you for sharing how it felt. I like the direction that Ceridwel wants to go with it. I have long felt that it was too hard to become anathema now, and ill let you know right now that I fought you across several towns and I enjoyed our fights. I have a hard time playing knights because I got too used to the freedom of being evil, and being able to murder the hoarder who has the gear I need. I also tend to play super edge of the line ruthless knights and that gets lots of complaints (not from ceridwel haha).
lionSpyre 
0 , 0 , 0 . I just want to throw my support behind virtually everything Ceridwel said here. Conduct with Knights is always a sensitive topic, and boy is there a fine line between a White Knight and a maniacal zealot (especially because everyone has an opinion on it). However.. I can say this is one aspect of Knights I really enjoyed. Almost counterintuitively, a strict code of conduct can give you a lot of motivation and creativity for RP. So I strongly believe that part of the fun of being a Knight is navigating those morally-grey situations from the perspective of someone who is utterly convinced that they embody a truly righteous cause.
Ragnvald 0 , 0 , 0 . No problem. I shared cos dogran asked me to share my thoughts. As long as everyone else is having fun in knights, all good.
[reply to Ragnvald]Obsidian vuln was really disappointing and didn't seem to make much of a difference at all. I get the reduced healing part, but I'd rather see capital damage.
I did find it odd the Knights who aren't chaotic can't invade on a Justice, that would bring some interesting flavor to this, but Crusade would really be interesting if it can somehow restrict the area for both involved.
Especially if these unwritten rules regarding corpse looting will be adhered to where you lose 1 or 2 items max makes for much more exciting fights with a conclusion without a devastating ending.
For the knight cabal:
1. Why are the knights required to obey other town's laws. That's really stupid. Why would the valour knights care about the laws of justice protecting seringale and timaran.
2. I wanted to RP as a knight that fights and destroys all evils. If I'm outnumbered and i think i have a chance to win I'll take it. That's why i fought thelrin and the other legion together. On the reverse, i was going to gank other evils. I sent a note for the knights to kill gulgru outside of town. If we have to obey seringale's law, the only way to purge gulgru was to make sure he doesn't make it back to town. But ceridwel stopped me. He said to fight honorably with gulgru. What are we now, Warlords?
3. Then i got very frustrated that gulgru got away from me because i had to cut him offf running back to seringale. He makes it back to seringale I'm not allowed to take a flag to finish him. I was so pissed and frustrated with that.
4. The last straw was telling me offline capping of cabal item is dishonorable. Like... i was expected to fight gulgru inside his cabal and burn through tens of thousands hp of guardians to seize his cabal item alone? It's not possible, that's the same as telling me no capturing of cabal item. The question was why? We're worse than warlords.
5. Intruding justice gets intruder. Killing justice with intruder gets wanted. Intruding knights, nothing. Killing knights, nothing. According to asara, killing one noble doesnt give anathema. Probably need a few kills like a tier level. How many nobles are there? There's only lirael who is seeking a pardon and ansel who broke his oath by becoming vessel. Ansel is seen 5mins a month to keep himself from inactive delete. So, anathema is non existent.
Class specific
1. Avenging angel requiring RP requirement to use is quite a turn off honestly. It's not really that strong anymore. Imagine after fulfilling the rp requirements for avenging angel, use avenging angel and the warrior dirts you. Flee and avenging angel fades because it lasts 2 hours and such a long cooldown.
2. The lack of aoe is another turn off. Radiance the only aoe requiring 24hr cooldown. Most of the time i wont be bothered chasing thieves. Waste of time.
Off the top of my head that's about it.
For me, i wanted to be a knight that is somewhat extremist. Honorable to friends (neutral and good aligned) but out to destroy evil using all means. So yeah, our ideas just dont align, so I'm out. Cheers.
Also, the intruder flag can be paid off easily and it doesn't cause much and it is written in the intruder helpfile that there are no longstanding repercussions for being an intruder at all. Generally speaking, if you want to kill a Justice, be ready to take the flag for it because the downside is that the Justice is duty bound to the laws of town and his opponent will always have safe haven in town.
Same thing goes for knowing when is it ok to attack a target with any numbers necessary. When you ordered the Knights to attack someone (who was not Anathema at the time) with any numbers necessary (aka "gank") I *had* to step in to overrule that. Your intended target was not Anathema at the time. Knights were not at war with the target nor their cabal. And, I think you were Rank 3 at the time so shouldn't have been giving such broad orders to the cabal yet anyways. Had you been Executor I would not have stepped in like that - I would have pulled you aside and discussed one on one. Executors get a bit of leeway to run the cabal the way they want without me stepping in to supersede but a rank 3 does not.
Offline capping of cabal items was discussed at the game community level sometime in the last few years and was determined to be such a dick move (if not at war) that I couldn't rightly allow a Rank 4 to do it. I might give a Rank 1 or 2 a strong slap on the wrist for doing it but that's different than giving a Rank 4 verbal permission to go do it. The option I gave you was in line with the constraints of the Knights moral code: offer him the Oath and when he refused start a Crusade then go crazy.
Knights are not bloodthirsty zealots. There is a moral code (The Virtues) that governs their actions and give them direction for their existence. There *has* to be a philosophical delineator that separates Knights from Legion, and that separation is the Virtues. Honor, Courage, and Respect. If Knights gank a non-Anathema they are no better than Legion. If Knights offline cap a non-warring cabal item they are cowards. If you want to RP a good-aligned character who will stop at nothing to eradicate evil, play a non-caballed Eradicator Paladin; that’s what they were created for.
Currently Nobles cannot issue an Anathema flag. In fact, it was only a few years ago that I was able to convince Dav to give that power to Executor rank. What Nobles *can* do is pardon Anathema. And, the killing of Nobles is supposed to lead to eventually being flagged as Anathema. BUT - I have long suspected the code for flagging Anathema for killing Nobles is either broken or not strict enough. Ilromie got pasted across the streets of Valour a couple times and their killer didn't get flagged.
Anathema not working properly is what I see as the real issue here. Anathema is supposed to be the status that allows Knights to take their gauntlets off (or put them on?) and kick some ass in any numbers necessary and in any methods necessary. I'm going to work with Dav offline on the following:
1) Review the Anathema code to see why killing a Noble isn't auto-flagging. In my opinion, I want murdering a Noble even once to flag as Anathema. Murdering Valor citizens who are not Nobles should also lead to eventual Anathema. Other things could as well. Share ideas if you have them. Note: the roll sheet in Valour currently lists Anathemas in order of how drastic their Anathema status is and therefore who Knights should target first.
2) Beef up the various guard mobs in Valour to attack Anathemas with more rigor. Currently some guards won't even attack Anathema. Being Anathema while in Valour should be as much a pain in the ass as being Wanted in a protected town is.
3) Lower the rank requirement for the ability to flag Anathema from 5 to 4.
Please feel free to share any other ideas people have on making Anathema more weighty either here or in a note to me in game.
Obviously, breaking the oath is anathema, but the question becomes, how do you handle people who will not or cannot take the oath in the first place?
Biggest thing I want to say is good luck on you next... I have openings in legion hint hint.
Re: anathema, 100% in full support. I remember messaging Ceridwel over the desire to anathema a thief who killed a noble inside the palace, based solely on the testimony of the noble. Ceridwel gave me the OK to pursue it as Executor, so I issued this very official letter to the thief (with Knights and Nobles cc'd) that they were accused of this crime and had a right to defend themselves. The thief wrote back pretty much telling me to fuck off, so I tagged him Anathema. Not sure how much the thief got out of that interaction RP-wise... but I can say it made Valour feel like a real place where actions against its citizens and nobility have real consequences.
Nah, not legion as of now. Maybe... regulators....?
[reply to Phostan]
Gulgru 0 , 0 , 0 . Maybe I am missing something, but what is the big deal about Anathema. If I am Anathema does that mean valour guards attack you like if you are wanted? Big deal I won't go to valour. And if I am Anathema that means Knights can HGOD ok big deal again, what is the likely hood that 3 knights log in when I log in. lionSpyre 
0 , 0 , 0 . I think that’s why we’re discussing it here, Gulgru. Up until now, it has meant Knights can use superior numbers or “any means necessary” to take you down. Now, it’s being discussed as Valour’s equivalent to wanted. lionSpyre 
0 , 0 , 0 . And I wouldn’t exactly dismiss “not going to Valour” as not a big deal. For example, I’m sure a Knight would feel much better about taking a flag to take you down if you had Anathema status. Because then, if the Knight is flagged, you would HAVE to go into Valour to get him. Gulgru 0 , 0 , 1 . But this is the stupid chicken or the egg discussion. I'm anathema he HAS to come kill me. So he takes a flag and immediately runs to Valour to force the fight in Valour and just waits for me to show up? Seems to be a lack of honor courage respect from my arm chair. Ragnvald 0 , 0 , 0 . Bottomline was, i misunderstood ceridwel's intent. I thought i could only break the law if you are anathema. Didn't want a shitstorm coming my way for not following the first virtue.
Hotun 0 , 0 , 0 . Ragnvald I don’t think you misunderstood Ceridwel’s intent. I think the intent was not very clear to begin with (per helpfiles). I agree with everything you said earlier.
Scrynor 
0 , 0 , 0 . Personally, I would love to see a Knight who pushes the line obey the code by operating in the gray. If you can't offline cap... discretely hire somebody else to do it. Just seems like there are lots of literally examples of the evil good guy entrenched in an high place in an organization but we don't often see the more evil leaning Knights behave like them. Perhaps roundabout methods are not appealing to the players who want to be an aggro Knight... but it would be cool to see.
[reply to Ashlyn]Secondly, i wanted to draw you out of seringale by either 1, being wanted or 2 capping your item. When i couldn't do either i decided it was time to move on. That's about it.
From the helpfiles it sounded very lame and counterintuitive. It actually sounds really boring to play.
1) Nobles have re-attained the ability to mark someone as Anathema for crimes against Valour befitting of such a status.
2) Knight's ability to mark someone Anathema has been dropped from Rank 5 to Rank 3.
3) Knights offline capping an enemy cabal item is allowed in some circumstances, such as when a member of the target cabal is Anathema. What I want to avoid is Knights capping items just to be dicks. There needs to be a solid RP reason for it.
4) Helpfiles will be updated to more clearly explain what "when duty allows" means, etc. Specifically, if chasing an Anathema or on a Crusade, all bets are off.
Let's try this for a while and see how it goes. We rely on your feedback to gauge whether changes help or hurt the game so please keep the feedback coming.
Dogran 
0 , 0 , 0 . That'd exciting, thanks Ceridwel I look forward to the mayhem.
[reply to Ceridwel]