Main > The Round Table
Is it Honorable to win, then say the loser should reign?
Lord Chagatai:
--- Quote from: Thorsteinn on 2014-06-20, 17:29:50 ---Personally, if I were X, I would feel some regret at Y not having the Throne, however I know how to surround myself with good people, and I play politics with a sledgehammer so I would quickly drive snotty courtiers & backbiters from my midst. Thusly I would accept the Crown and gladly too.
--- End quote ---
Thorsteinn, playing SCA as long as we have...you and I both know politics with a sledge hammer can sometimes backfire :)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Thorsteinn:
--- Quote from: Lord Chagatai on 2014-06-22, 04:04:23 ---Thorsteinn, playing SCA as long as we have...you and I both know politics with a sledge hammer can sometimes backfire :)
--- End quote ---
When you use a sledgehammer folks tend to not try with you ever again. ;D
Lord Chagatai:
--- Quote from: Thorsteinn on 2014-06-22, 07:13:13 ---
--- Quote from: Lord Chagatai on 2014-06-22, 04:04:23 ---Thorsteinn, playing SCA as long as we have...you and I both know politics with a sledge hammer can sometimes backfire :)
--- End quote ---
When you use a sledgehammer folks tend to not try with you ever again. ;D
--- End quote ---
True very true...but I hate the politics part of why I am not playing right now... :D
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
scott2978:
Not in the SCA and unaware of all the rules, but conceding after the fight is won seems more cowardly than charitable in my opinion. Perhaps the original intent of X was to disgrace Y by defeating him and then handing him the crown, which is certainly unchivalrous at least. I can't think of any way to deem the act honorable, even if the result is a better king. The end does not justify the means.
This reminds me of a friendly contest between comrades in which you recognize an opportunity to win. Do you let the other win because he's your friend and you desire him to be happy, or defeat him because he's your friend and you desire to be honest with him?
Scott
Eva de Carduus Weald:
I feel, and this is only my opinion, that handing Y the crown after defeating them is cowardly. I feel that if you swear an oath with all of the information on the work involved in being King/Queen, and fight people who think they can do the job, and defeat them, that it is now your responsibility to fulfill the duties you signed up for. By defeating everyone else and handing the crown to the other guy, what you are saying is, "I just wanted to show how awesome I am, I didn't really want the job and this sucker can have it now, aren't I just so awesome?"
This is not honorable but to me does say that X would have made a terrible King. Personally I don't think being able to kick other people's butts is a good measure for the top spot in administration, although I suppose it is a good way to shut down people wanting to argue with you. Disagreeing courtier 1 "But Sire, are you sure ordering every fighter to fight is purple paisley tights is a good idea?" King "Do you want me to prove how right I am with my sword again?" No longer disagreeing courtier, "No no Sire, of course you are right!"
Seriously, the King/Queen isn't a position that involves fighting, that is why you have guards, knights, and nobles with sharp pointy swords and maces and axes and etc....
Still, if X feels he would not make a good King/Queen, then don't enter, don't find a consort, don't make the oaths, and bottom line, don't fight. This is called common sense and forethought. Poor Y fought with all their might and might or might not make a better King/Queen, but are now going to have their reign known as the one handed to them for losing. You now stain *their* honor rather than simply losing or not fighting in the first place. This seems like attention seeking to me, not honor.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version