Cavalier - Replace Omitted Text

[President]

Replace:

Any character that is a Knight of the Realm may become a Cavalier, by giving up all ranks in the class being given up to become a 1st rank Cavalier provided that the player has won a Noble Council Tournament. Cavaliers are characters who serve a particular god, or crusade for a cause. They must be of lawful alignment whether it is good, neutral, or evil. Cavaliers may use any weapon (though they disdain the use of missile or ranged weapons) and any type of shield. They are required to wear armor from the AR2, AR1 or AR0 armor ratings when fighting, and garb which would suit ‘Nobility’ when they are not fighting.

With:

Cavalier is a restricted class. A participant who was earned Order of the Sword may elect to give up all ranks in a single class (in which they are 10th rank or higher) in order to start a 1st rank Cavalier. Cavaliers are characters who serve a particular god, or crusade for a cause. They must be of lawful alignment whether it is good, neutral, or evil. Cavaliers may use any weapon (though they disdain the use of missile or ranged weapons) and any type of shield. They are required to wear armor from the AC3 or AC4 armor classes when fighting is expected, and garb which would suit ‘Nobility’ when fighting is not expected.

[President]

So the NC noticed this and I was hoping I could make a ruling on it, but there is nothing unclear about the rule. What is clear is that the requirement for the class to be 10th rank or higher is missing and I can't just put it back in since it is a game rule.

So I am submitting this on behalf of the NC to fix missing requirements.

[Sir Sturmbjorne]

Co-signed.

[fingers630]

So in essence they are required to give up a 10th ranked character instead of making a lvl 1 fighter after achieving lvl 10 with another, then sacking said lvl 1 character to become a cavalier? I absolutely agree 100%.

[HRH Malkin]

John, If you're going to add omitted rules back in... somewhere in there, can you also please re-add the part where it says Cavalier must wear armor "when fighting is expected".

So... if I take off armor for a moment in camp... and in the process we happen to get attacked... I can still pick up a weapon and help fend off the invaders... instead of being forced to first don armor and watch my countrymen struggle without me... while I am trying to buckle straps instead of helping in the fight...?

I don't see how that omission ever made and sense to anyone. I don't see a paladin/cavalier ever chosing to put on armor vs. helping win a battle. If I expect to be fighting, I need to wear armor (because Cavaliers should be decked out... I get it)... but we shouldn't be expected to wear chain and plate 24/7... Or be denied the capacity to fight, just because we've just got done with lunch and we don't have a piece of breastplate on...

Basically if a thief comes in to camp while I am eating and walks right up to me... even if i have a dagger at my side, I can't fight because I am not wearing my armor... basically I either let him kill me, run, or call myself out of play... that imho is just F-ing stupid.

The rules were correct before... we should go back to that wording.

Thanks,
Malkin

[President]

GOOD CALL!!

Will add that text.

[fingers630]

Yup I agree with Gary.

[Lord Valfryn]

Cosign

[Sir Sturmbjorne]

Cosigned with Malkin's changes as well.

[President]

Would you all like me to put a hold on this until AFTER the bylaws???

I heard talk at the event about Order of the Sword being the suggested requirement for Cavalier.

[Lord Cailen Sendor]

makes sense

[Lord Valfryn]

If we are using Orders, then yes... that would sum up the "noble fight win" requirement, right?

[President]

If we are using Orders, then yes... that would sum up the "noble fight win" requirement, right?

That is the talk....yes.

[Lord Valfryn]

I would like to see the class require minimum of AR2 on TORSO.. thoughts?

[President]

I would like to see the class require minimum of AR2 on TORSO.. thoughts?

Now is the time to discuss.

If the armor proposal passes, it will become AC3.

John M

[fingers630]

Personally I dont see it as a big deal unless of course you change the name of the class to Knight. Wearing chain or studded/ring doesnt really sway my opinion of how I view a "cavalier"

[Lord Dubh]

Personally I dont see it as a big deal unless of course you change the name of the class to Knight. Wearing chain or studded/ring doesnt really sway my opinion of how I view a "cavalier"

In the new rules it makes a much larger difference.

[fingers630]

Making someone wear chain over Studded is a huge difference?

[Lord Cailen Sendor]

As a player that has been required to wear chain or above for the last 20 years and in my other character wears studded I say yes it is a huge difference

According to the new rules it should be required to wear ac 3 or 4 when fighting is to be expected if it means anything that this class represents the champions of there cause what ever that cause is.

[Lord Valfryn]

I was mostly after it saying specifically that the armor worn had to be on the torso, at minimum. Wearing a plate bracer, I don't feel counts as "armor worn", but if we are in the "clarification/drafting " mode, I was suggesting we specify that the torso is the main armored location.

If the armor prop passes, AR3 would be the minimum armor worn, which is fine.. it already falls in line with the chainreqs.

[Lord Dubh]

I was mostly after it saying specifically that the armor worn had to be on the torso, at minimum. Wearing a plate bracer, I don't feel counts as "armor worn", but if we are in the "clarification/drafting " mode, I was suggesting we specify that the torso is the main armored location.

If the armor prop passes, AR3 would be the minimum armor worn, which is fine.. it already falls in line with the chainreqs.

In the early rulebooks it was torso.

[Lord Cailen Sendor]

I agree to me and even now I interperate it to be that I have to have on a breastplate or a chainmail chest or anything of that equivlant

[HRH Malkin]

Honestly, I think this could be left to the individual. Think about the cavaliers in the game and whether or not this must be written. Cailen, Slindar, Me, Alfred, Martin... etc... we pretty much always wear our plate when we can. On Days when it's 100+ degrees with no shade, to have a rule that says someone MUST wear a breastplate of X armor type enforces a level of risk for no good reason, especially when you have many aging cavaliers out there... including myself;P

I know some people are gonna say stuff like "I always wear my plate, even when it's 9,000 degrees outside"... to that I say, yeah... me too.. but that's not the point... the point is, that's your choice... just because some people want to tough it out doesn't mean that everyone should be forced to take the same risks you choose to take yourself.

Cavaliers are normally going to wear heavy armor when they can, because wearing heavy armor in Darkon makes you live longer and because it's part of the personna and each person who plays a cavalier knows this and abides by this ideolgy.

[Lord Valfryn]

Well now that chain and butted is the same AR, a light butted vest isnt too much of a stretch for anyone, considering those can be made of cloth covered plates. Looks good, falls within the reqs and hell, if you're a fugggen knight at Darkon, I don't think it's a poor/ unreasonable purchase.

[Lord Valfryn]

I also think that the title "Cavalier" is poor.
Knight is better, can easily be named black knight, white knight and grey knight respectively with alignment.