Jump to content

[✓] [Magic Lore] Malchediael's Radiant Templars


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, CH453 said:

Remeron, for neglecting the Paladin rewrite for over 16 months.

 

oop

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was worried it would mimic paladins and thier abilities when I first saw this, however it really doesn't and fills in something nice for another holy magic. Well done 

Link to post
Share on other sites

actually good lore +1

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, CH453 said:
  •  To needlessly kill an innocent is the action of a craven rat.


I really feel like the tenets are too OOCly motivated, sorry chief.

This is literally you to me when we play Among Us. ..

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is sick. Well done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Gravens are an exception to this.

I find this curious, as Phantoms are explicitly not allowed to possess magics whatsoever. I would presume this is an exception to the Phantom redlines? 

 

Quote

Malchediael’s Dogma and Victor’s Justice

The Aengul Malchediael places valour and honour as highly as courage. These values combine to form his Dogma, a code which Templars over the years have drawn inspiration from for their actions.

 

  1.  To needlessly kill an innocent is the action of a craven rat.
  2. The act of betraying your brothers-in-arms leaves you nothing more than a snake in the grass. 
  3. Accept challenges laid before you with fervor.
  4. If a disagreement is allowed to fester, settle it through a rite of combat; the feud is to be  resolved upon a decisive victory.
  5. It is greatly dishonourable to utilize Malchediael or his Blessing as a way to accrue wealth or fame.
     

Should a Templar assume a compatriot to have been led astray from Malchediael’s ideologies, at any time, they are able to invoke Victor’s Justice. This allows for a Templar to face another Templar in single combat within an enclosed ring which cannot be entered or exited, to ensure a fair fight. Whichever combatant emerges triumphant has the option to either suppress the fallen’s blessing for two years, or to strike it from them entirely. If the latter is chosen, Malchediael’s blessing is cleaved directly from one’s soul, the final strike entirely incorporeal as it severs the connection between a Templar and the Aengul of Courage.

 

When a Templar’s blessing is stripped, the individual loses all will to fight. Even in self defense they find themselves lacking the motivation to protect themselves. 

 

-Victor’s Justice can only be evoked by a Templar of T4 or higher in an open area.
- The dueling ring of Victor’s Justice has a diameter of seven blocks, and once created only allows for the two Templar combatants to remain within, all others finding themselves physically unable to enter or intervene. The ring’s effects dissipate upon the decision of the victorious Templar.
- If a blessing is suppressed, it lasts for 2 OOC weeks.

This is something I think gives cause for concern. With the lack of a redemption mechanic like the one found in Paladinism, incredibly subjective tenets with no exact clarification, and the ability to revoke a blessing at any time, I can very easily see issues arising from this. Even moreso, due to the format of the duel, which could lead to powergaming to avoid the incredibly egregious consequences of disconnection. 

 

Taking away a character’s ability to “fight” entirely is crippling, and without regulation I can easily see this being abused, in combination with the subjective tenets and lack of any legitimate disconnection rules beyond the duel. While I could see such a consequence if this were a multi-slot magic with more stringent DC rules, this is a one slot magic without such things. A minor commitment has major consequences if a higher tier Templar decides that any one of their compatriots has strayed even slightly, they can bar an entire type of RP from the persona entirely ad infinitum with no chance of recovery.

 

While initially this may not be abused, you have to recognize the potential for abuse. As written, Victor’s Justice doesn’t even require someone to have broken a code, or for the one declaring the duel to have belief that a code has been broken. In addition, the one declaring the duel may premeditate and ambush another Templar for the duel. E.G, Walking up to someone who is unarmored, while you are within full platemail, before declaring the duel. 

 

This is not to say that the lore is bad/terrible/etc, because I do quite love the abilities. But the disconnection/connection rules do need some work, in my opinion. With such incredibly damning consequences if you earn someone’s ire, as well as the prior points, the potential for abuse among a community is very high and, with the ability of any Templar to simply... make more Templars, I can see this getting out of hand very quickly. 

 

My critique would be to ease on the consequences of disconnection, because at current they are some of the most extreme, if not the most extreme, of any magic I currently know the DC clauses of offhand. Clarify and expand on the clauses that can lead to a DC, and apply more regulations to the Victor’s Justice mechanic to truly enforce a “fair fight” as per the magic’s aim, rather than encouraging ambushing curbstomps. I would also advise placing more restrictions on the creation of new Paladins, which would encourage quality control and reduce the likelihood of even needing to use Victor’s Justice to begin with. I would also add specifics to the codes of Malchediel, to work hand-in-hand with Victor’s Justice and guiding new Templars on how they should behave.

 

Overall, a very solid magic lore, with just three major hiccups. I’ll give it my +1 if the issues above are fixed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Always felt Xanic didn’t have enough competition, that it was a shame that the word paladin was synonymous with a specific magic group as opposed to what really should be an entire brand of magics. Nice idea overall, I’m a fan. Moar holy knights.

One gripe I have is the tenants and such: I recall it being a consistent problem that I’ve seen said multiple times for multiple different deific magics is that tenants are not meant to be written and enforced by the laws of the magic itself but instead orchestrated IRP. Why shouldn’t this also follow that guideline?

 

Having it imbued into the lore would place too much power into whatever sect of this magic is endorsed by the lore writer and any friends of theirs on the story team, or that’s the reasoning I’ve consistently seen before, I feel it should continue. Not super 100% on that gripe tho and I’d like to see what you may think and your reasoning is, Chase.

Otherwise, and really overall, I really like this. +1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chase I could kiss you, +1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, altiar1011 said:

I find this curious, as Phantoms are explicitly not allowed to possess magics whatsoever. I would presume this is an exception to the Phantom redlines? 

Rift and I were inspired by the aspect of Gravens being their obsessive focus on something, as well as the idea of ‘holy’ gravens, most notably a character we interacted with on Axios, who was a paladin turned Graven. It would be an exception to the redlines unless the lore reviewers see otherwise. Sorcerio also brought up some concerns, which will be properly redlined

 

1 hour ago, altiar1011 said:

This is something I think gives cause for concern. With the lack of a redemption mechanic like the one found in Paladinism, incredibly subjective tenets with no exact clarification, and the ability to revoke a blessing at any time, I can very easily see issues arising from this. Even moreso, due to the format of the duel, which could lead to powergaming to avoid the incredibly egregious consequences of disconnection. 

 

Taking away a character’s ability to “fight” entirely is crippling, and without regulation I can easily see this being abused, in combination with the subjective tenets and lack of any legitimate disconnection rules beyond the duel. While I could see such a consequence if this were a multi-slot magic with more stringent DC rules, this is a one slot magic without such things. A minor commitment has major consequences if a higher tier Templar decides that any one of their compatriots has strayed even slightly, they can bar an entire type of RP from the persona entirely ad infinitum with no chance of recovery.

 

While initially this may not be abused, you have to recognize the potential for abuse. As written, Victor’s Justice doesn’t even require someone to have broken a code, or for the one declaring the duel to have belief that a code has been broken. In addition, the one declaring the duel may premeditate and ambush another Templar for the duel. E.G, Walking up to someone who is unarmored, while you are within full platemail, before declaring the duel. 

 

This is not to say that the lore is bad/terrible/etc, because I do quite love the abilities. But the disconnection/connection rules do need some work, in my opinion. With such incredibly damning consequences if you earn someone’s ire, as well as the prior points, the potential for abuse among a community is very high and, with the ability of any Templar to simply... make more Templars, I can see this getting out of hand very quickly. 

 

My critique would be to ease on the consequences of disconnection, because at current they are some of the most extreme, if not the most extreme, of any magic I currently know the DC clauses of offhand. Clarify and expand on the clauses that can lead to a DC, and apply more regulations to the Victor’s Justice mechanic to truly enforce a “fair fight” as per the magic’s aim, rather than encouraging ambushing curbstomps. I would also advise placing more restrictions on the creation of new Paladins, which would encourage quality control and reduce the likelihood of even needing to use Victor’s Justice to begin with. I would also add specifics to the codes of Malchediel, to work hand-in-hand with Victor’s Justice and guiding new Templars on how they should behave.

 

Overall, a very solid magic lore, with just three major hiccups. I’ll give it my +1 if the issues above are fixed. 

The idea with the chaos disconnection clause of quite literally beating it out of another boils down acting in good spirits and regards for others. The reasoning with Victor’s Justice not requiring a broken part of the code, is so that it is a stigma that is enforced through roleplay, rather than, for example, the tenet bending and rule lawyering that comes with Paladin tenets, or something similar. You are absolutely correct that the disconnection ritual itself needs to be ironed out, as the repercussions for having your blessing stripped, and you’ll see this reflected in the changelog shortly

 

47 minutes ago, Noobli said:

Always felt Xanic didn’t have enough competition, that it was a shame that the word paladin was synonymous with a specific magic group as opposed to what really should be an entire brand of magics. Nice idea overall, I’m a fan. Moar holy knights.

One gripe I have is the tenants and such: I recall it being a consistent problem that I’ve seen said multiple times for multiple different deific magics is that tenants are not meant to be written and enforced by the laws of the magic itself but instead orchestrated IRP. Why shouldn’t this also follow that guideline?

 

Having it imbued into the lore would place too much power into whatever sect of this magic is endorsed by the lore writer and any friends of theirs on the story team, or that’s the reasoning I’ve consistently seen before, I feel it should continue. Not super 100% on that gripe tho and I’d like to see what you may think and your reasoning is, Chase.

Otherwise, and really overall, I really like this. +1

The dogma is supposed to be strictly through rp, in the same sense of druidic unattunements, where if people see wrong, they can take action if they know unattunement. The same applies to Malchediael’s Templars. I only get as much say as to edit after feedback, and to choose the other TA loreholder. After it starts to spread organically, I would only be able to stop that irply. The Dogma is included with the lore for ease of access, however it is something that the Templars would be taught from whomever teaches them.

 

 

If I missed or overlooked anything, please feel free to let me know. If you want to talk via an easier method other than the forums, my discord is Chase#2597

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The idea with the chaos disconnection clause of quite literally beating it out of another boils down acting in good spirits and regards for others. The reasoning with Victor’s Justice not requiring a broken part of the code, is so that it is a stigma that is enforced through roleplay, rather than, for example, the tenet bending and rule lawyering that comes with Paladin tenets, or something similar. You are absolutely correct that the disconnection ritual itself needs to be ironed out, as the repercussions for having your blessing stripped, and you’ll see this reflected in the changelog shortly

My only worry was the extremely open disconnection clauses, combined with the vagueness of VJ and such. I take the approach of “redline the **** out of things so they can’t be abused,” rather than a more trusting approach. With the extremely open nature of the Magic, requiring a short connection ritual that doesn’t really even require IRP consent, merely OOC, I worry for people abusing mechanics that would otherwise be fine if all are acting in good faith. 

 

Regardless, I look forward to seeing what you put in the change log, and discussing this further with you over discord. +1

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...