Illarion.org

Yeah, but in my opinion the code can be "evil" but the knights must still act as if it was righteous.

So no acting like "We will burn and pillage the sleeping hamlet of Greenbriar, Murdering the young and old alike and drinking blood of infants from skull-goblets!! Mwahah!", but rather something along the lines of "We will strike down the wretched people of Greenbriar with Righteous Fury and Vengeance! In the Name of Malachin, CHAAARGE!"
With the results being more or less the same.

It's all about the way things are presented. Actions are nothing, Image is everything.

Silas Farron wrote:

Silas, the medivasl knight where everything but good guys...

They were supposed to.
Being a Knight was not really being a warrior on a horse wearing an armor, beinga knight meant following a very narrow-minded code, which consisted of many virtues, as:
Generosity
Mercy
Humility
Etc. etc.

And yes, I know that they possibly acted else. A knight, however, is exactly what i told right now. This is the correct definition of a real knight.
Period.

It's everyone with a knighthood is a knight. Yes they're supposed to be gallant and chivilrous but this wasn't always the case.

you brits and british ex colonials should know your arthurian legends, on should suppose.
a knight, stepping too far from the codex was an outcast.

That all depends on the eyes that regard. I doubt the muslims likd them much. i am not sure what they are called in english, but I am refering to the wholy raids. they raped and killed, both women and children.

Knight killed knight, it was all about having an excuse... Follow a code, and be noble. the code could just as well be kill children, right? A knight does not even have to be riding I think.

yes.
but that was ok.
in those times understanding infidels were not really regarded as human.

Indeed, my point. A knight is really a noble warrior i think.

A knight does not even have to be riding I think

the tournaments show, that the fighting on horseback was held in higher esteem than fighting on foot.

in german, italian and in french even the word for knight means "rider"

Ritter Cabagliere Chevalier

Indeed, but it was not required? Right? In that case illa. has no knights;) Remember? no horses. That is a good idea though..

i agree, that in illa there are no knights.
but not by a lack of horses, more by a lack of knowledge.
the "knights" in illa seem to be played like democratic minded klark kent types.

They are just noble warriors. Have a try Samantha;)

i hope, that you did not call me "samantha".....

but, noble fighters - that is the whole point.
show me an illarion knight, that acts mostly noble.

I wasn't refering to you. And it has nothing to do with how you act, it is who your parents are... Again, I think.

by that definition we got one noble char...........Grant Rothman

I think everyone is confusing what a knight should be verses what they were.

A knight SHOULD be:
Kind
Couragous
Generous
Honourable
And so on with the virtues.

What a knight WAS:
Power hungry
Rich
Bastards
Who were mostly of noble birth
And fought for a king

Allways noble, if so not from birth. It was the only criteria I think.

There are different types of knights. Most people think of the Holy orders, such as the Templars when they think of knights. These were a lot different from the 'normal'/'noble' knights. But basically anyone who did something 'worthy' could become a knight, not just nobility.
Plus, of course you have to judge good and bad based on the morals of the time, not modern morals. Times were a lot harder back then with a lot more superstition, etc. A lot of 'evil' was done in the name of religion. The Inquisition, the crusades, etc.

BUT....what does any of this have to do with magic?

I think the mana costs for spells need to be adjusted. Since the last client update they seem to have increased dramatically (3x for some small spells and 10x or more for some others). Effects and learning dont seem to be any different. So now mages will be burning mana potions at an alarming rate to stand any chance of improving their skills.
Or is it just me who has this happening?

USE BLACK MAGIC!

Grant wrote:USE BLACK MAGIC!

reads the posts particularly the last one and looks curious

Well ya see homie, you get some sugur, rice crispies and tar, and mix it all up, then you enchant the liquid with some words from the Ghetto!

Dantagon Marescot wrote:I think everyone is confusing what a knight should be verses what they were.

A knight SHOULD be:
Kind
Couragous
Generous
Honourable
And so on with the virtues.

What a knight WAS:
Power hungry
Rich
Bastards
Who were mostly of noble birth
And fought for a king

Yeah I disagree with that to.

Ok, so back on topic. how do you think a mage should look like in illa?

okay, about this.. archmages are supposed to be the wisest beings on the island.. So wise that they KNOW that powerful is not the one that think he is, but the one that refrains from using it.

Indeed, but that is mostly about rp. I mean, how npowerfull should a mage be? I think the mages should be few, and powerfull. When i say "archmage" I don't mean the illarion title... just a very powerfull mage.

I think in terms of three main levels of magic.

Magic users. Low to mid range mental/magic stats. They would only ever have a few simple runes and spells. These would be characters mostly dedicated to something else who 'pick up a little magic along the way'. As such they would be quite few in numbers and would never be able to teach. Ideally they should also be limited to the runes they can learn and use.

Mages. Mid to good mental/magic stats. These are your standard mages. Characters created to be mages but also with abilities to do a few other things fairly well. These would be the most numerous of all. Some would be able to teach, but not all. All would have the potential to learn all the spell and runes (except the teaching rune which only a few should ever have). Though use of some spells might be limited due to stats, etc.

Archmages. High mental/magic stats. Very few in numbers. These would be solely dedicated to magic doing very little else besides. All archmages would heve all runes and be able to teach.

Just my thoughts.

nice thoughts, but I was thinking more on how mighty a completely trained mage should be. I think mightier than any warrior. But very few.
i think there should be a lot more aprentises too, maybe that one should have to apply to get to play a mage.

but how do you limit the players of the mages unless its GM controlled? there no possible way to say "your one of the x many archmages" and give them the skills...and its impossible as far as i know to limit the abilities of a player IG skill wise to be sure only x amount of mages reach Archmage ranking

They've done a pretty strong job of limiting the players of mages thus far, I don't see why it can't easily continue.

I don't mean "archmage" like a rank. I just mean that a pure mage should be seldom, but strong.

Virtually impossible to do that, near everyone'd want to be an archmage.