Well, it does give you an idea what it takes to be a knight.
| AMIA ARCHIVE https://amiaworld.net/phpBB3/ |
|
| Amia and Knights https://amiaworld.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=35239 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:07 PM ] |
| Post subject: | Amia and Knights |
--- |
|
| Author: | Dev Disco [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:10 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Isn't there a male stripper group like the Chippendales called XYZ Knights? |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:17 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Dev Disco [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:23 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, it does give you an idea what it takes to be a knight.
|
|
| Author: | -Cloak-and-Dagger- [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:30 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use the word knight mainly because I'm loathe to use class names IC. I prefer to just use a catch-all term for a character rather than explain away each of his/her classes. "Im a Knight" > "I'm a Paladin, but I've had some training as a ...." and so on. |
|
| Author: | Delarwyn [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:30 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, the Law Knights were connected to the Duke and now to the council in Cordor. All of them nobles, I would think. The Triadic Knights even though not connected to Kohlingen nobility as the Defenders are, are Knights in name of their Gods that are above all Nobility. They are like Templar Knights. The Weave Knights are also noble connected to the Tower, but under Mystra. I believe the council in the Tower of Mystra are formed by nobility and so are their Knights. The War Knights are under Tempus and are kind of Templar Knights, but more rough around the edges. They are a mix of honored warriors and Knights. I dont know about the other Knights, but what I have observed is that knighthood in Amia is more connected to Religious Order or a God than actually nobility itself. |
|
| Author: | Athyonn Ursidae [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:33 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
As I unerstand the terms a Knight is granted by the lord of the land, even if that is not a king. The equivelant roll within the temple (class architypes aside) -Is- that of a Paladin I think. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:47 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 14:56 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
War Knights, Knight of Tempus and the Red Knight. Knights devoted to the order of the flaming sword. A knight of a different standard. Knight or Kh-nig-it, is more a title then a class or standard. Thus it can be a self appointed title, or one appointed by a church or group. The idea that a knight must be holy and such if fairy tale crap (Beats the censor!). Knight is, a title, nothing more, nothing less. Chivarly and such never had anything to do with a knight historically, and even fairy tales and fantasy acknowledge the idea of a knight not always being good with things such as the Black Knight or the Dark Knight (Not Batman). So chivarly, standing for good and such, its all just a staple attached to the title knight by Arthurian tales. |
|
| Author: | Athyonn Ursidae [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:00 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Knights historically speaking have never been given out as titles from the church or any religious group. And before anyone mentions the crusades, they were knights of the king who yes did happen to be head of the church. |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:05 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Athyonn Ursidae wrote: Knights historically speaking have never been given out as titles from the church or any religious group.
And before anyone mentions the crusades, they were knights of the king who yes did happen to be head of the church. Incorrect. You think that being a Knight in a castle wasn't a title that gave you privlages above the standard of a serf? If so, you are sadly mistaken. Edit: Correction, a "Rulers" knight. |
|
| Author: | Athyonn Ursidae [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:08 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Knights did not have castles in point of fact. In fact the image of a knight in plate mail is entirely wrong, as many could not even afford the more modest -pieces- of plate to protect themselves. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:10 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:12 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes, but you directly said my statement was wrong. That it was not a title. It was a title, though I'm not disagreeing with you on the armor and weapons thing. Wikipedia wrote: Knight is the English term for a social position originating in the Middle Ages. In the Commonwealth of Nations, knighthood is a non-heritable form of gentry. Elsewhere, the Portuguese Cavaleiro (like the following, related to "chivalry"), the Spanish Caballero , the Italian Cavaliere, the French "Chevalier", the German Ritter (like the following, related to "rider"), the Swedish Riddare and the Norwegian, Dutch and Danish "Ridder" as well as the Czech rytíř, Finnish Ritari and the Polish Kawaler (for Modern Era knighthoods or Rycerz for medieval knighthoods) are commonly used in Continental Europe. Outside the British Commonwealth, the title is respected but may carry less significance, and thus may or may not appear, for example, in the mass media and other publications. There are technically differing levels of knighthood (see Order of the British Empire), but in practice these are even more symbolic than the title itself today and thus only express the greatness of the recipient's achievements in the eyes of the Crown. I hate to quote Wikipedia only, so here's another. AskOxford.com: A website that reference the oxford dictionary. wrote: knight
• noun 1 (in the Middle Ages) a man raised to honourable military rank after service as a page and squire. 2 (in the UK) a man awarded a non-hereditary title by the sovereign and entitled to use ‘Sir’ in front of his name. 3 a chess piece, typically shaped like a horse’s head, that moves by jumping to the opposite corner of a rectangle two squares by three. 4 (also knight of the shire) historical a gentleman representing a shire or county in Parliament. @Phearun: Oh so not the case. Knights where not asked to protect the weak and such at all. In most cases, they tended to serve a lord in defence of the lords land and people. What that defence meant was barely ever honourable. |
|
| Author: | Athyonn Ursidae [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:13 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
*sagenod to Selvec* I agree entirely
|
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:17 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Phearun, it seems that it depends entirely on what you see the meaning of Honourable and Chivalry to be. I do see what you have said to be acts of Chivalristic nature at all. Nor honourable in any sense. If anything, a lot of what you said simply seems to be discipline. |
|
| Author: | Shrewd [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:19 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think it is a broad term that people use in different ways. What matters is -how- you use the title. And that needs to be looked at case by case. If you're running a group and want your members to progress by ranks of Page, Squire, Knight, etc, then that's one thing. But I think people are pretty much free to call themselves whatever they want, since they are coming from all over Toril to get to Amia. There's such a wide range, it's too hard to determine on a general basis. |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:21 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Marauth wrote: I think it is a broad term that people use in different ways. What matters is -how- you use the title. And that needs to be looked at case by case.
If you're running a group and want your members to progress by ranks of Page, Squire, Knight, etc, then that's one thing. But I think people are pretty much free to call themselves whatever they want, since they are coming from all over Toril to get to Amia. There's such a wide range, it's too hard to determine on a general basis. To true. It's possiably why the class of Paladin or Divine Champion exists, rather then knight. A Paladin seem's to be the embodiment of the typical honourable arthurian knight, something seen and associated with fantasy. |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:25 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Athyonn Ursidae wrote: *sagenod to Selvec* I agree entirely
Doh, it's 4pm and I made an ass of myself by arguing a completely different point above. Apologises I wasn't to sure about the knight being given out as a title by religious groups, so I tossed it in there to cover bases. <_< |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 15:53 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:00 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Pretty much only nobles could afford full plate armor, and it wasn't really for use in standard hand-to-hand combat. You could be pushed over and that was that. Full plate was typically used for Calvary, who were hoisted onto the horse via pulleys. Half-plate and splint mail was for foot-warriors offering greater mobility and almost the same protection. It was also cheaper. Then you have the typical chain-mail which was more typical. And Leather armors for the basic soldier. We are playing in high fantasy though and so joint work and weight are more abstract concepts of thought given form through max dex bonuses allowed and a numerical value of weight vs your lifting capacity. In part some of these values are balanced with gaming in mind rather than realism. Also on the topic of Fantasy, some people play Knights in full respect in that they rp fielty to some church, lord, ideal, etc. Not everyone in full plate is a Knight. Ask Saris. He'll tell you he's king. Ask plate-wearing pale-masters. I doubt any of them claim Knighthood. Why full plate = knight is beyond me in a land where gold flows like honey and magic items can be found in a dog's arse. Maybe back in the day, you needed a Noble to buy you the full plate, or be a noble yourself to afford it.. But here.... here you are poor if you can't saddle up a million gold for an auction. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:07 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Dev Disco [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:12 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
It has been mentioned above, but most of the time 'knight' meant a member of a knightly order, not just a dude in a tin can. It was also a father-on-son thing. Combine this with the need for soem high dude to knight you and you get a picture in which becoming a knight by buying a suit of plate is as plausible as getting a child without intercourse. The good thing: It's not impossible! |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:18 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
We've had a few people claim to be royalty of distant lands visiting the isle. I think claiming to be the servant of a lord in a far off land is far more plausible. |
|
| Author: | Selvec Darkon [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:28 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Heh, you should know this one Halen. Titles are not endorsed or recognised offically unless confirmation has been gotten by a DM. So someone wanting to be treated as a noble knight, or a knight of a higher station then a normal person, will likely end up with his plate shoved as far up his backside as possiable. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:33 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:36 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Certainly do. But I don't think we have to nit pick on certain things. A person can be a farmer without dm saying it's alright. Could be a seamstress, a blacksmith, a momma's boy, etc. A Knight doesn't entitle someone to anything really. Also take into consideration those that decide to make a Knightly order? You end up with a Lord whom is supported by Vassals (i.e.) the other Knights, just by the virtue of it's formation. Now you have nobility and true "knights" with full justification without a Dm being able to say yay-or-nay. The pros are that they support each other, and have a common goal, great rp. Cons are that they didn't gain anything beyond mutual support and have to follow orders. A Knight isn't so special in a land chop full of adventurers. He's just another flavor of adventurers. Then you have the Purple Dragon Knight class. |
|
| Author: | ainjyll [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:42 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Merriam-Webster Dictionary Online wrote: 1 a (1): a mounted man-at-arms serving a feudal superior ; especially : a man ceremonially inducted into special military rank usually after completing service as page and squire (2): a man honored by a sovereign for merit and in Great Britain ranking below a baronet (3): a person of antiquity equal to a knight in rank b: a man devoted to the service of a lady as her attendant or champion c: a member of an order or society
This is the definition of a knight. If you meet any of the criteria listed, you are a knight. If you do not, then you are not a knight. As for their armor... well, the fairy-tale picture of the knight in shining armor is real nice, but not the reality of the situation. Luckily, we play a fantasy game where fairy-tale is perfect. |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:49 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
So Weave Knights are Knights, Oninre is a Knight to Valkirya, War Knights are Knights, etc. |
|
| Author: | Dev Disco [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 16:51 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
That is not true. The same definition can be used for different words. Option 1 is quite wide and could also include armed couriers, for instance. It's just like defining a tree as a tall plant. That's certainly true, but being a tall plant doesn't define you as a tree. |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:01 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes, but all squares are retangles. The point being is that any of those definitions = Knight. It's nothing more than being another title to lop onto a character that no one really cares about. "Hi I'm Bob, the Knight." "Oh yeah? How so?" "I defend and attend mine lady fair, Brunhilda." "Ahhhh... well... I think I'll go talk to the War Knights and see if they are recruiting." |
|
| Author: | Magiros [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:12 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Phearnun wrote: Quote: Now, the term Knight is a broad one. The meaning was different in the various centuries and in the different countries. For me a Knight is martial nobility, tasked to follow a code of chivalry of some sort. They are members of a high social class, and their children have a chance to become a knight, but they are not automatically like in the other forms of nobility.
Well as you said it is a broad one. Your view is very romaticised, for some knight can be inlitirate, uneducated, not having a high social ranking, but has a sword and armor + shield. Therefore is good warrior who has earned the rank of knight, and sometimes doesnt even need to be a good one. There is nowhere said that we should call the defenders or triadic knights or anyone as knights, it is the players own view how they want to call their knights. I, for one, wont call you a knight if your char doesnt deserve it. Simple as that. My sun elf havent yet called anyone a knight, whereas my sorc might call you knight even if you werent one. Sd Halen said, its a mere title, like ones that some elfs have and I dont even bother to check out what they stand for. So, each for their own. No matter how well you have planned your "knight" my chars wotn necesarily call it as one, ever. |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:13 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Halen tends to respect titles of Knight. Saris will use it Mockingly against someone. Oni will only call someone a Knight if they have a cow over it being left off the greeting. |
|
| Author: | IronAngel [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:23 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Debating the universal meaning of a word is pretty silly, to be honest. Words have no meaning in and of themselves. They're only given meaning in a context. And the context of a stereotypical fantasy game is different from the context of European history. Person A is a knight in culture X, if the speakers of the language x recognize him as someone who fulfills their criteria of "knight." Person B is a knight in culture Z, if the speakers of the language z recognize him as someone who fulfills their criteria of "knight". Person A would not necessarily be recognized as a knight in culture Z, and vice versa. Rix'Rax the Good Drow might be part of an Eilistraeen knightly order, but not recognized as a knight in Cormyr, where swearing fealty to king and country is an essential measure of any man or woman's honour. Deadeye the Blackguard might be a knight of Cyric, but not recognized as a knight by the Church of Tyr. Babyface the Bard might be a master of courtly love and chivalry, hailed as a true knight in a hamlet somewhere in the Heartlands, but he'd be dismissed as an upstart fop in Waterdeep. Or anywhere else, for that matter. It's a matter of IC reception, as with any title. We can't really apply an OOC standard to something that's defined by characters via role-play. Does it matter? Do you have to be able to point out the PCs that are really knights, and the ones that are just pretending? |
|
| Author: | Magiros [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:26 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Iron, you so said what I wanted to say, thanks! |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:27 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Exactly my point. I the end it all comes form whether or not you can garner the respect you feel your character and whatever title he happens to hold for whatever reason deserves. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:30 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:33 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
There was the King of Benwick, but that got burned up. Lord Darius Tristram was the first Lord of the Defenders, and I think that mantle was passed through the leadership of the Defenders. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:38 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | herkles [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:40 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Phearnun wrote: My next question would be about amian nobility. Which places has nobility besides Cordor? Is there nobility in Kohlingen, who are members?
I myself was going to ask a similar question, but more in regards to PC groups. are there PC nobles of Cordor for example? I am not sure if khol has any nobles or not, myself. I don't believe winya has any noble elven familes. There are the drow noblity, but you probaly already know about them and doubt you are looking for them. Though I haven't really seen any real nobles, save for the drow nobles. I haven't seen a human knight that is a noble, an elf from a noble family afaik. thus I am wondering about the same thing if there are nobles around. |
|
| Author: | IronAngel [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:41 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good question, and one I'd like to see answered. I would imagine there are old knightly families in Kohlingen enjoying the benefits of nobility, though there's not much work in city government for feudal lords. Who they are, and how many, I have no idea. Winya does not have the social hierarchy to have a distinct noble class, but I would imagine older families are more respected. Ultrinnan is a no-brainer. There aren't many cities large enough on Amia to support an advanced social hierarchy. Generally, you have those who produce food and physical labour, the crafters and merchants, the soldiers, the clergy, and some kind of a ruling body. With the size of Amian settlements, though, the government is oftentimes very small. Wharftown has a mayor, Bendir Dale is a democracy, Wiltun is an autocracy. In Barak Runedar, PC actions excepted, I suppose seniority and clan age/size is equivalent to nobility. |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:45 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
The City of Cordor had the Duke, whom was the lord of the city and was nobility. There are also merchant nobles in the city of cordor or were, if the paper-boy is to be believed. Now the city is a Commonwealth, and can be seen as either a coup that stole the rightful power of the noble Duke, or as the people's revolution. |
|
| Author: | IronAngel [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 17:59 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm not sure if a ruler can be considered nobility, even if Monty was called Duke. Nobility usually involves some kind of social or economic priviledge, vassalage, and it might be hereditary. An autocrat who doesn't pay taxes nor answer to a higher lord isn't really nobility. Nobility is generally a caste whose role is either as a supporter of the ruler's interests or as an opponent to challenge the ruler's authority. It's not very dynamic if they're one and the same, is it? |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 18:02 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well it was passed from Montgomery to montgomery if you looked at the statues of the past Dukes that were around the city. He clearly enjoyed priviledges and taxes. How it ultimately got started, I'm not entirely sure. |
|
| Author: | herkles [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 18:03 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
well depends, in france for example you had the 3 estates, 1st being the clergy, 2nd being noblity and royalty((save for the king himself who according to wiki was outside the estates)) and the 3rd estates, ie everyone else. so for the sake of simplicty royalty could be counted as noblity. we after all do consider princes, princesses and so forth as being part of noblity generally. anyways, my own question is aside from the PC drow houses, are there any PC nobles of any sort? weather merchant houses in cordor or traditonal nobles in khol. I just would like to know more about the PC nobles if there are any. |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 18:04 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Pretty much on Amia/Arelith it was what you established yourself. Not sure what the PC that played the King of Benwick did to become king, but people went along with it and he had a grand army of PC's. |
|
| Author: | Pony [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 18:22 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
--- |
|
| Author: | Halen_Van [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 18:26 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Halen turned down the knighting by the King of Benwick. |
|
| Author: | Yossarin [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 18:28 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yes, there were a handful of PCs awarded noble status by Duke Montgomery during the Fall of Cordor, in the midst of its reconstruction. |
|
| Author: | davis114 [ Wed, Feb 11 2009, 19:12 PM ] |
| Post subject: | |
Anyone can be Knighted. It only takes someone of sufficient rank in whatever Order or Church they wish to join to do it. Case in point? Elton John is a Knight. Git has never had a shield or shining armor, I don't think. But he wrote a song for somebody, and BAM. As for the War Knights, there is a severe training program for new members, and they are squired to particular Knights. Once they pass their tests to both the Knight's satisfaction, and my own, they are Knighted at a ceremony involving every Flaming Blade member. I dunno what it is exactly you consider a Knight to be, but if it is a member of an established Order, Knighted by their leader, that follows a specific code, then...Tada. Knights. Now, I do agree with Phearnun. Crunch doesn't give anyone his respect unless they earn it first. Title or not title. He also very rarely uses his own title. It is, in fact, generally used for him in introductions than by his own doing. The same can be said about pretty much every other faction calling themselves Knights, I believe. They all follow some sort of code or rule, and attempt to enforce it. Now, technically, nobility is the only thing that has been able to create Knights in the past. Correction: Our past. The history of medieval Europe may, in fact, be not such a good role model for the history of the Realms. Even if it were, there is so much that is different on Amia as compared to the rest of Toril, I doubt it holds up. But I have to say, it would be fun rp for each faction leader to explain their right to Knighthoods or Knighting. Maybe someone would discover some ancient line of nobility? Maybe some are frauds? Maybe some are elves hidden in the bodies of frogs hidden in the bodies of half-elven necromantic palemastery Red dragon disciples? :O |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|