[✗] [Lore Amendment] Paladinism | A Vital Fix

[Valannor 6352]

From “Trials of the Arknight”:

Spoiler

Trials of the Arknight for progression:

 

 

 

The Arknight must have graduated at least one student

The Arknight has performed great feats that embodies the faith of paladin, like hunting darkspawn, charity for innocents, saving another from grave danger, aiding those of their brotherhood in a grand endeavour such as a crusade, etc.

The Arknight has written a manuscript on Xan and his teachings, which may be in the form of a mechanical tome or a forum post.

The Arknight has crafted and created Sacred Artificery, and has learned of all blessings and orisons. 

 

To:

Spoiler

Trials of the Arknight for progression:

 

 

 

The Arknight must have graduated at least one student to an archetype OR administered the Initiate trials of a prospective Paladin until their completion. 

The Arknight has performed great feats that embodies the faith of paladin, like hunting darkspawn, charity for innocents, saving another from grave danger, aiding those of their brotherhood in a grand endeavour such as a crusade, etc. 

The Arknight has written a manuscript on Xan and his teachings, which may be in the form of a mechanical tome or a forum post. 

The Arknight has crafted and created Sacred Artificery, and has learned of all blessings and orisons.

 

Reasoning:

Through a community-wide referendum, it was unanimously decided that requiring one to teach exclusively in order to uptier was an untenable system - and while we can definitely see why Johann would embed such a mechanic in the magic, so as to encourage its spread, we have found that it encourages the active degradation of the magic’s integrity, and limits the possibility of individuals reaching Tier 5 on the numbers of prospective students who they believe fit to share the blessing to through roleplay. Thus, this amendment aims to introduce an alternative means of progression should the individual wish not to teach in order to progress.

 

[SimplySeo 5568]

join vc nerd I wanna vibe.

[Evonpire 1853]

Can any of the five be event darkspawn? 

[Valannor 6352]

1 minute ago, Evonpire said:

Can any of the five be event darkspawn? 

nub. it'd be far too easy in that case

[Sorcerio 4606]

Not quite sure how I feel about this. While culturally I totally vibe with the killing of darkspawn and the progression of cultural trials, I don't think ascension through the ranks of paladinism should require killing of a specific community in-lore. Targeting dark CAs with magics is fine, but if you have to kill someone of a certain playerbase to ascend then it really just becomes an OOC motivation rather than a narrative one. In my mind, hinging roleplay on something like that will only serve to promote animosity and discourage good faith between darkspawn communities and holy ones (e.g. "I need to kill you to improve in my magic therefore I'm unwilling to yield or make compromises for roleplay OOCly.")

[Lhindir_ 3445]

 

1 minute ago, Sorcerio said:

 hinging roleplay 

Hinged.

[ScreamingDingo 17472]

xan blesses me for murderhoboing necromancers on the road

 

ave the golden lion

[Lhindir_ 3445]

But in all seriousness pund is right. This also dosnt address the fact that druids are literal darkspawn as per lore, as their magic has a dragon that IS actively involved ( gave out aspect stones recently).  

[Valannor 6352]

32 minutes ago, Sorcerio said:

Not quite sure how I feel about this. While culturally I totally vibe with the killing of darkspawn and the progression of cultural trials, I don't think ascension through the ranks of paladinism should require killing of a specific community in-lore. Targeting dark CAs with magics is fine, but if you have to kill someone of a certain playerbase to ascend then it really just becomes an OOC motivation rather than a narrative one. In my mind, hinging roleplay on something like that will only serve to promote animosity and discourage good faith between darksapwn communities and holy ones (e.g. "I need to kill you to improve in my magic therefore I'm unwilling to yield or make compromises in roleplay.")

 

While I appreciate the sentiment, Johann has already made killing darkspawn a very foundational mechanic of Paladinism required for progression - such as in the case of Chancery progression, wherein a high-tier Darkspawn such as a Wight, Arch-Lich, Azdrazi, etc. must have their remains sacrificed to attain the final tier of chancery, The Trial of the Hunter in order to become a Wyrmstalker, and indeed one of the potential criteria to uptier already was the slaying of Darkspawn. Paladins have very often faced harsh criticism for allowing Darkspawn to live in order to further a narrative, and it's something we cannot seem to win on - either we let spooks live to further a story and get dragged through the mud over it, or we slay them as we should and the same follows. Furthermore, it is an optional route of progression and one could simply just train a student to progress instead. 

 

13 minutes ago, Lhindir_ said:

But in all seriousness pund is right. This also dosnt address the fact that druids are literal darkspawn as per lore, as their magic has a dragon. 

 

Recent eventlines have shown Xan doesn't care about us working with druids, and Clerics had a dragon once - are Tahariae mages, former and future, to be taken as Darkspawn for this? Nor are druids inherently of a dark or draconic origin, as the lore outlines for Darkspawn criteria. While I appreciate the headcanon that you follow, it is by no means something canonized in current lore. Taynei is still gonna get shot at by Paladins if she shows up, but druids themselves do not fall under the definition of Darkspawn. 

[Lhindir_ 3445]

11 minutes ago, Valannor said:

 

 

 

Recent eventlines have shown Xan doesn't care about us working with druids, and Clerics had a dragon once - are Tahariae mages, former and future, to be taken as Darkspawn for this? Nor are druids inherently of a dark or draconic origin, as the lore outlines for Darkspawn criteria. While I appreciate the headcanon that you follow, it is by no means something canonized in current lore. Taynei is still gonna get shot at by Paladins if she shows up, but druids themselves do not fall under the definition of Darkspawn. 

Tah dosnt have a magic at the moment.

Wait so why would Taynei get shot but her literal followers NOT be? Azdrazi heralds (Followers of a dragon) most definitely get shot. We LITERALLY have a sect of our magic called Wyrmstalkers. 

 

[Sorcerio 4606]

1 hour ago, Valannor said:

While I appreciate the sentiment, Johann has already made killing darkspawn a very foundational mechanic of Paladinism required for progression - such as in the case of Chancery progression, wherein a high-tier Darkspawn such as a Wight, Arch-Lich, Azdrazi, etc. must have their remains sacrificed to attain the final tier of chancery, The Trial of the Hunter in order to become a Wyrmstalker, and indeed one of the potential criteria to uptier already was the slaying of Darkspawn. Paladins have very often faced harsh criticism for allowing Darkspawn to live in order to further a narrative, and it's something we cannot seem to win on - either we let spooks live to further a story and get dragged through the mud over it, or we slay them as we should and the same follows. Furthermore, it is an optional route of progression and one could simply just train a student to progress instead. 

 

 

I'm not saying you need to let darkspawn live. You absolutely should be driven to kill them without relent in RP. But when it comes down to encountering one, if a paladin player needs to a darkspawn OOCly to progress in the magic, then they're going to be much more adamant and unyielding OOCly when it comes narrative flexibility. For example, they would be less willing to let darkstalker flee, or even losing the battle - why? Because otherwise they wouldn't be able to progress. There's an element of good faith which this particular amendment doesn't really foster. On the other hand, if players can choose to just drain a student to progress instead, then the mechanic is redundant and unnecessary, and only serves to be inflammatory when chosen as an option. 

 

If the problem here is the lore already requires the killing of darkspawn to mechanically progress, then amend that. The solution is to get out of the hole, not dig deeper into it. 

 

[Wizzar 503]

Regardless of whether the paladinism community prefers the student requirement, does it fulfill its purpose? 

 

I do not entirely understand the reasonings provided. While "active degradation" of the magic surely sounds threatening, what exactly do you mean by this? 

 

 

[Valannor 6352]

8 minutes ago, Wizzar said:

Regardless of whether the paladinism community prefers the student requirement, does it fulfill its purpose? 

 

I do not entirely understand the reasonings provided. While "active degradation" of the magic surely sounds threatening, what exactly do you mean by this? 

 

In that one is forced, at the current moment, to teach just to progress to the final tier - something that encourages rapidly teaching people with little care, as opposed to picking students who will roleplay the magic properly. It has led to some issues in the past, and halted progression for others in the magic. It's something the community as a whole unanimously desires an alternative to, as some people acknowledge they would not make good teachers, and others are selective of prospective students. 

[ronin_champloo 5951]

Unironically requiring (x) to progress only makes more problems — see necros needing dragon parts, from an event, to turn into a lich or the murderhoboing ways (30~ kills) of the Mystics to turn into a Wight. Imagine that for Paladins when they have to deal with spooks who either hide or don’t do anything, the ppl that do are often doing it to get killed or stupid as they get caught. It’s a stranglehold in progression that LOTS of magics face rn tbh
 

Now direct that to a bloodthirsty playerbase, whom a few (not naming names, but you’re aware of my dislike of you :S) are rampant PGers and Metagamers when it comes to conflict that concerns their characters and the progression to get cool magics and spells. Forcing a playerbase to do conflict just to progress isn’t, and won’t be in good faith — as hopeful and chill as some of our lads can be — since it isn’t made through natural development of RP. It isn’t ‘they did (x), gotta go deal with them via words or blood’ it turns into ‘gosh, to get to T(x) I have to murder a spook. Who’s on that I can message, or even deal with right now?’. It isn’t dynamic at all, it feels forced even if the magic is directed towards the killing of darkspawn — well, more specifically dragonkin

 

I know it’s not what you intend to do, but there’s a myriad of ways that you can take it, and a bunch of interesting stuff. Maybe they’re put into an arena with a chancery, and the golden mist comes out as a challenger in some manner of beast — this can be played by an ET or a Player as some Player-Ran event with a lot more freedom. Obviously, some ppl will try and say ‘I faced Azdromoth in the hyperbolic training chamber…’ but then they’ll get cockslapped by him or a level 1 mafia noob which will be hilarious

 

as for the druid argument, no they aren’t seen as darkspawn however alien chin xan hates all of his siblings and anything that isn’t an untouched descendant. There’s a reason why Druids and paladins used to hate each other, and it took a druid making an character to become one to forcibly bridge the gap. I kind of like the idea that paladins are actual magic nazis who give no aid or support to anything that isn’t a mundane or untouched descendant, makes it more interesting than the generic white knights they are

[Elennanore 2854]

delete CAs and MAs, simple as