First of all, Malicia, it was Serenwilde who first started bitching on this thread about how we started a war. So stuff it.

And yes, certain Serenwilders...TUEK and NARSRIM...attacking Magnagora as a whole. Being members of Serenwilde (And prominent members at that), it reflects on the will of the Commune, being that they are not told to stop.

And Gregori's own words say that village raiding isn't considered an act of war. Your own Marshall has said, "Go ahead, raid us. We don't mind!"

In regards to Munsia, ignorance of the situation is no excuse.

And interestingly, I too, agree with Gregori. Yes, this -should- be dealt with IC, I don't deny that for one second.

Doesn't change the facts as to what's been happening.

Wasn't it Drago that showed his disapproval at the actions of those who partook in the raid of the Moondancer GH? And he's Mag. Ah well.. it should be dealt with ic. See what happens then.

He said it on here, but as far as I'm aware, no one knows that they raided the Moondancer Tower aside from those whow ere around. No one has bragged about it ingame.

What I said was that is has become socially acceptable that we don't wage war over the fact. I never once said we don't mind it happening. Perhaps you should go to the back of the class with the other people needing to learn to read.

As for the whole redirection and your arguments caused mine to fall apart. No. I simply grew tired of pounding my head against a wall trying to point out what Etanru was nice enough to simplify for me.

Yes, but your theory is inherently flawed, which I also pointed out.

Namely, if a citizen of Country A kills citizen of Country B, and Country A protects citizen from Country B (Either by not turning him over, or not punishing him), then Country A is saying "It's alright to do this to you," and -therefore-, while the citizen initially may not have represented Country A's attitude, Country A -accepted- that representation.

Example: Recently, there was a tentative agreement to stop melding up the mountain (Or so I understand - we'll assume that my facts are in order for the purposes of this example). Now, I go and meld up the mountain, and you get pissy about it. I have thusly violated this agreement. Now, what makes the difference between my being a lone individual who went and did something of my own accord, and my being an individual who's acting on behalf of my guild is wether or not my guild punishes me for it. If I get punished, then I was just a stupid individual asking for trouble. If I do not get punished for it, then wether or not my guild asked me to do so, I am representing their will.

Similarly, Narsrim and Tuek are members of Serenwilde. The war was ended, and they continued taking war-like actions against Magnagora. Serenwilde may not have asked them to do this, nor even wanted it, -but-, by failure to stop them, you are saying, "We didn't mean it when we said we'd end the war." It doesn't -matter- if it's brought up by us....it very well should be, I won't deny, but when you said, "The war is over. We won't attack you if you don't attack us," you agreed to maintain a certain level of peace. Village raiding, you claim is acceptable...irritating, but acceptable. It's simply going to happen, whatever. That's fine. I won't even try to claim that randomly jumping commune enemies is necessarily a bad thing (And vice versa, of course). -However-, you are allowing members of your Commune to commit -major- acts of aggression against Magnagora. By failing to say, "Hey...you shouldn't be doing that. We aren't at war," you -are- saying, "YEAH! Kick Tainted !!! You roxxor!"

Am I saying Narsrim and Tuek don't have good reason to attack? No. I'll assume they do. Even if they don't, even -if- they're just coming up with whatever excuse they can to be a pain in the , we'll say they do have a good excuse.
So what?
It's the duty of the Commune as a whole....no, wait. It's your duty, Marshall, to make sure that your political agreements are upheld. If you agree to end a war, as you did, it is your job to tell the citizens of Serenwilde, "Stop killing Ladantine. Stop killing Gorgulu."

At the end of the day, all you really have is your credibility. If you won't uphold your agreements, simply non-aggression agreements, why would anyone trust you for anything else? You can't, or won't, prevent acts of war, after you agreed to do just that.

And then Serenwilde and Celest has the audacity to claim that Magnagora isn't trustworthy.

What a load of truffle juice.

There are griefers on all sides. Some of the griefers come up with IC excuses and some don't.

In what possible way can raids on denizens in a controlled village, or denizens on an allied plane, be considered an equivalent to, or even compared to, raids on non-combatant players inside a guildhall? Is that really the best you can come up with for after-the-fact justification? How can anyone not see the orders of magnitude separating these actions?

I can't believe everyone is quibbling about whether the action of one party or other is representative of the actions of his parent organization. What a red herring. If the only non-ludicrous argument the defense can dredge up is that only some of the defendants are horribly guilty, that's more telling than all the arguments of the prosecution.

By roleplay, Denizens are just as important as players.

If denizens in a village you control die too much, it increases the chance of the village revolting. How are they not important?

They're not AS important, is the point Gwylifar makes. Killing the players attacks the city/commune's members directly, killing the demons/villagers attacks the city/commune's economy. It's essentially the difference between murder and theft. (Is the argument. I think.)

Thinking that they aren't as important is metagaming.

As I've already pointed out, I'll agree with Gregori that border skirmishes occur. Villages -will- be raided, city/commune enemies -will- be jumped. It's just going to happen.

Which leads to the other points....

How is your coming to kill me, while I'm sitting on what can arguably be considered on our turf, and -then- killing the bloke I've been sitting there guarding for four hours ruining all my work...any different from us coming to kill a few of your guys in your turf, and taking an action which will take five minutes -tops- to undo. Oh, and waiting for a couple of NPCs to repop on their own in ten or fifteen minutes.

Oh wait...it -is- different. Namely, your attack was -far- more damaging! I'm trying very, very hard to refrain from personal attacks here, and I have to say, the repetative stupidity and illogic is making it very difficult.

And while we're on the subject, we'll go with your theory that they aren't representative of the guild or commune...by your own words, Gwylifar, they're griefers. Good to know there's confirmation on the other side of the fence.

If you're going to try to claim that my arguements are invalid for some reason or another, actually back up your statement with something other than "They're not trying to start a war, they're just holes!"

Gardenerian Wicca is actually an amazingly strict religion. It's guided by 161 (I think) laws that involve really really terrible things if you break them.

http://wicca.timerift.net/laws/161.html

I refer you to law 35: And if any break these Laws, even under torture, THE CURSE OF THE GODDESS SHALL BE UPON THEM, so they may never be reborn on earth and may remain where they belong, in the hell of the Christians.

An example of a law one can break, the nearby law 36: Let each High Priestess govern her Coven with justice and love, with the help and advice of the High Priest and the Elders, always heeding the advice of the Messenger of the Gods if he cometh.

or another, law 51: If you would keep a book, let it be in your own hand of write. Let brothers and sisters copy what they will, but never let the book out of your hands, and never keep the writings of another.

Share your writings and pay the ultimate price!

Even real world wicca isn't free from laws, constrictions, or harsh punishments. There's no precedent for any other method of conducting guild matters.

That's the first time I've ever read such a huge list of Wiccan Dogma, and I was a Wiccan for a time . Anywho, just wanted to point out that I don't know of any single Wiccan who actually follows all of those laws. Most keep it simple and stick to a few, such as 'And it harm none, done as ye will', 'the rule of 3', 'the law of return'
, etc.

Anyway, interesting read!

You could say the law of return is hitting both Magnagora and Serenwilde now couldn't you?

Party A: *raids*
Party B: Revenge! *raids raids raids*
Party A: *gasp* They raided us more! *raids raids raids raids raids raids raids raids raids*
.
.
.

I have no problem with individuals attacking and hurting organizations. (although it would be nice if they were less cowardly about it... I as a player want to feel like its a conflict I'm a part of, not a conflict I'm watching)

What I have such a large problem with is people from said organization comming on these OOC forums and screaming... "Some individuals just attacked our Organization... don't do it again or I'll declare war!"

In the forums I want to feel like I'm watching the conflict, in game I want to be able to be part of the conflict. That is why I'm playing a game, and not reading a book or watching a movie.

I will refer you all to the first page of this thread so you can see how a "funnies" turned into some sort of IC political contest.


And again, if your going to be all lawyery about this.. The attack was on Moondancer property, not serenwilde.

Feel free to talk to me. You want to know what happened?

Llexyn asked Merloch if he was willing to speak to her, me and Murphy (I don't know why Murphy was included, as he's not Iron Council, but there you go) he said no, though I don't think that was his exact words.

That's the last word Drago heard about the raid on the Moondancer GH and, as such, the only place I can whine about it is here as, for all he cares, the moondancers/serenwilde can rot in Celest as when they were approached, they didn't want to talk. He also sees that action as Serenwilde approving Narsrim/Tuek's actions.

I've really stopped caring. There's a reason I spend 60% of my time in my manse.

How is Serenwilde approving my actions when they play no part in them? The argument being made thus far goes like this, "Serenwilde condones Narsrim and Tuek because they don't try and force them to do as X-city desires." Unlike Magnagora were the leadership is known to -force- people to do stuff (like forcing noncombatants to defend and die for stuff thus ruining what little joy they do find or stripping them of their hard earned exp bashing or sending novices out into the field to get creamed), Serenwilde and Celest don't sanction every little action. In fact, that's one big difference in a Commune versus City. Cities are supposed to be all caught up in political intrigue, etc. Serenwilde is a forest. It has different standards and one of them tends to be personal freedom because that's "Nature's way."

Weren't the earlier posts arguing about how restrictive Moondancer was, and how they're right to be that restrictive? And I guess you were too busy on the frontlines to notice how insistent some people can be in getting support covens for you guys (least we can do and all, so it isn't like I disagree), even to the extent of flowing to those afk ones to get them into the coven.

And I remember the Serenguard being expected / encouraged, if not more or less forced to fight too in defense (something about it in their ghelp). The commune and cities really aren't as different as some people would like to make them out to be. But you're right about one thing: I can't remember Serenwilde using novices as meatshields / just to add a bit of damage before they die. Then again, Celest was kinda desperate, and Magnagora had some novices who volunteered, and some who were, as you said, forced at times.

The Moondancers have restrictive policies against the Taint, yes. However, the option is to do as you wish and trade/intereact as you see best OR respect the guild's wishes. The difference being that those who respect the guild's wishes are more likely to be guild favoured, receive guild credits, etc.

The difference in Magnagora is that people have been threatened to either defend or else. I'm not going to name names because I know that would only cause such persons more grief. However, there have been a few cases where people were literally forced to go out into the field to help defend a village, influence, or raid. They were noncombatants and got slaughtered and lost their hard earned experience. Had they refused, they could have potentially been booted out of the city.

I see a difference. The Moondancers don't sanction choice. They are simply restrictive (for example, we don't power ban or mistreat Viscanti Moondancers. We may discourage such racial selection and encourage reincarnation but no one is punished because of such).

EDIT:

And as for support Covens, I do not recall (although you are more than welcome to give an example if I am wrong) a person being punished for refusing to join a support Coven.

Besides, if you were around why didn't you ever actually produce any work? There was *one* thing you wrote. Just one, and it wasn't really in the proper sort of format. You ignored feedback on it and never resubmitted an amended version. You had at least three or four assignments that never got done. You were kept around much longer than you should have been out of deference for your time in the guild, but I should have removed you much sooner than I did. I was way too soft about that.

Umm, how does this in any way answer the questions posed that you quoted?