Hmm...what is the attraction you have to the musty original measure, I wonder?Well, I can't be sure, but both you and I have no real idea on its contents. The people who do, Liam and Gunthar, both thought it was overwrought and too much, and cut it down.
I agree that the Measure should be a guideline to the proper Code of Conduct for a Knight. It should, however, allow some flexibility to allow for the realities of life as a Knight.
While rule by Knights Councils and military chain-of-command is essential in full-scale warfare, they can be debillitating in circumstances wherein a Knight's superiors are hundreds of miles away and not cognizant of a current situation.
A Knight should not be the same thing as a common soldier in fancier armor. In the field Knights need to have a workable system of operating under consensus. After all, if they weren't good enough to make decisions they should not be Knights in the first place.
Knights should accept guidance from clergy of the Gods of Good. They should be advised to be mindful of the opinions of those with special knowledge, such as wizards.
The Measure should place emphasis on the Knight's duty to support the cause of Good and underline that all the disciplines and behaviors of the Knighthood are valid only if they serve this goal. If an action (or lack of action) is legal under the Measure but clearly beneficial to the cause of Evil then that (in)action is invalidated.
The Measure should not be subject to mass-updates every few centuries. It should be subject to constant review. Knightly gatherings should include public recounting of recent activities of Knights, how the Measure benefitted their duties, how it hindered their duties, what their actions were and what the consequences of those actions were. From that it can be examined what the Knighthood is doing right and wrong and discourse and prayer can be had to examine methods of improvement.
I personally hate the idea of the clergy being involved with the Knighthood. I realize that the knighthood is spiritually based and had 3 gods no less inspire their forming. But, I while I think they should be mindful and respectful of the clergy, look at the example of the kingpriest. I don't want the Knighthood turning into the militant arm of the clergy. They shouldnt be one and the same. Also, the gods have left the world so far twice. I don't think if I was the knighthood I would be quick to steep everything in religion. Who knows what else could happen in the future. Been "burned" twice. Not necessarily so harsh, but still if I was a mortal I'd be bitter also.
Now if an action did do evil but was sanctioned by the Measure, maybe the Knight needs to report the problem. I realize in combat situations that this isnt possible, but I hate giving a knight a go ahead to do what they want if they think the action is evil. Derek commanding his army to go out and fight was not an evil action. He was the commanding officer and had the right to decide when and how they attack. Sturm disobeying was a direct infraction and should be punished accordingly. That none of them survived and things came out great is lucky. You do not want individual people being able to make decisions contradicting the line of command on a constant basis. There is no discipline then.
If you choose to update the Measure on a constant basis, you *will* cause constant problems. A knight will go against the Measure and then say "yea well I think we need to revise it and I'm sure it just hasnt come up yet". Revisions will be seen as a given and people will just assume they can change it whenever they want. And geez, with constant revisions these people will constantly all need to know the new "amendments". You will create a new kind of knight, the "lawyer knight". Every outpost will need one just so they always keep up on the current "rulings". I liked the Measure being a huge, vast reference. Them changing it once after thousands of years to be more up to date with time didnt bother me. The key part being...changing once. This shouldnt be a constant thing where the knights figure things will be added and subtracted on a constant basis.
While I do agree that it should be flexible enough for individual think. But this shouldnt be paramount in a military situation that has a clear line of command. Knights shouldnt be encouraged to "go rogue" whenever they disagree witha decision or they think something is evil/wrong. You never know if you dont have all the information or all the experience to be able to tell something. A superior knight is a superiour because he has experience and theoretically earned that spot. His leadership should be seen as a huge thing.
This needs to be emphasized - the Measure stands for the dry, regimented, overly lawful aspect of the Solamnics which characterizes their tragic flaw. They have never been represented in the novels as an organization without that flaw, and this is why some people have complained about them. I personally welcome their role in the setting in this way, as I do any organization which on the most basic level attempts to be the paragon of virtue, honor and courage and yet by the very nature of the universe, cannot help but be fraught with individuals like Derek who miss the point.
Cheers,
Cam
I.e. obediance to one's commander comes with the knowledge that starting a war with allied nations is bad.
Also some stress should be placed on the Measure being interpreted by those of higher wisdom and the words themselves can be used against them.
The principles of higher knights interpreting the Measure for lower knights should also be stressed I think.
Not every knight NEEDS to memorize the Constitution and legal system but copies to consult for everyone should be made available at chapter houses and legal courts for all knights to use.
Finally, I have no problem whatsoever with the association with White Wizards and Priests.
The Knights are aware that many matters are beyond their power like Chaos and other evils that a wizard is better equipped to handle. Yes, their loyalty is to magic primarily not good but that is why they are not knights but wizards and no human being is perfect. Their counsel should be valued.
Clerics like the Kingpriest should no more overshadow the Knighthood than Rennard should overshadow the Solamnics. It should be stressed though that the Divine Hammer is a mistake and the clergy does not need a secular ideal based military. It's easy to get "drunk" on divinity.
The Solamnic Knighthood should probably keep their own counsel of overview even as priests should definitely have their counsel sought as well. Paladins are better judges for knightly stadards even as Knights too can be blinded by hubris and a good priest can take him down a peg.
The Tribunal force of a White Mage, a White Priest, and a White Knight are without a doubt the greatest and best rounded protecton the forces of good can have.
Ignorance is not bliss. Turning your nose up at people you don't like and disregarding their insights doesn't make you a wiser person. It makes you a stuck up prig.
The same, by the way, can be said in religion. Notice that I pointed out that faith in the gods and faith in the church is not the same thing. The problem during the reign of Istar was that nobody bothered to second-guess the Kingpriest. This includes the Knights with their vaunted Measure. Especially towards the end the gods were making no secret of their displeasure and the Knights could have averted the Cataclysm simply by listening and acting upon what they would have learned had they been more open-minded.
I am reminded of how amazed Crysania was that nobody in Istar seemed to feel the god's displeasure as clearly as she could. The reason was that everybody was too wrapped up in their legalistic social paradigm to even consider that the Kingpriest might not be right.
But too often they rely solely on their own counsel. And that is the shortcoming that has proven to be their greatest weakness. They are unwilling to listen to any voice but their own, and so consquently they hear only one voice.
Ariakan nearly kicked the Solamnics' butts into the dirt because he saw all these flaws and took advantage of them.
Magic is a great example. It's okay if you don't like it. But ignoring it simply means that when somebody else uses it against you then you're going to get sucker punched.
The Measure can thus become a trap. Rather than enabling the Knights to achieve their duty, they often must do so in spite of it. Hardly a positive scenario.
In the DL setting the Knights often fall into the same category as the elves. Dogmatic, ponderous, obstinate and generally too wrapped up in themselves to notice that the world is perpetually changing all around them. Then when something bad happens they are caught with their pants down because they're too busy debating the finer points of law to actually take action.
So yes the Measure needs to be more of a living document. The alternative is more of the stagnation that has gripped the Knighthood for more than 400 years. And those are not proud times! They were too complacent to oppose the Kingpriest as he ventured into the Realms of ultimate heresy. They were too fragmented to help much during the Age of Despair. They were only just barely awoken out of their ennui in time to be useful during the War of the Lance. They nearly got buried by the Knights of Takhisis before the Chaos War. And they were about as useful as a horde of kender during the Dragon Purge.
In all of those instances a large chunk of the problem was that they were scratching their heads trying to figure out what chapter of the Measure addressed their current problems and were lost because they couldn't find it. At this rate they're going to have to append to the Tobril into it if they hope to get even close to a comprehensive guidebook to fixing the world's problems.
I *like* the traditional knights. I saw them in the Chronicles and fell in love with their system and their culture. Apparrantly a lot of other people did too. And now, everyone wants to "modernize" them and change them. "Get them with the times". Why dont you just change the individuals a little. Why can't we have a knighthood that is steeped in tradition, does the chivalry thing, honors their past, etc. Why can't they follow the Measure and try to uphold it. Stop trying to make them a group of individual thinkers and that all that other stuff is "musty and outdated". Go hang out with the Knights of the Steel.. or the Knights of Neraka if you like it. Or have in the campaign a new knighthood being formed with their emphasis on "the individual" instead of trying to change the already established knighthood.
This conversation is going the same way as the elven one. Everyone says they are stuck up, they learned their lesson, etc. Now everyone wants them to be charitable and nice, the perfect "goodness". God I *hope* Dragonlance doesnt turn into the world where there is a certainr ace that is "evil" and all others are there to try to eradicate it. I like the idea that good and evil exist in all races, all cultures, all people. You can't just say.. hey they are the evil ones in the world.. kill them. Even the Knights of Neraka are liked some places at different times because they brought stability. I like this. I like the intrigue, the variety, the uniqueness.
And now religion. You people want religion to be a big part of the knights live, but I personally believe spirutuality should be. Theres a difference. Each knight believes in what they want, do whats right, and follow the Measure because it was made to guide the knights' lives. You say you want them to be big into the gods. Well what happens when the Knights disagree with what the clergy of Kiri-Jolith wants? While the gods are very active, its amazing just how much the gods dont come down and tell thier worshippers what they should do. So I say keep the Knighthood away from the clergy. That way they still keep their individuality. I dont want the Knighthood as the militant arm of the clergy, who are there to do the bidding of the clergy of Kiri-Jolith. I dont agree with them needing one level in cleric either as a requirement. I think they should gain spellcasting right when they take the Knight of the Sword class. They get spells from Kiri-Jolith, but they arent a "cleric of Kiri-Jolith". This means that the Knights of the Sword and clerics of Kiri-Jolith arent one in the same.
All in all, you guys may not agree, but I think too many of you are trying to change the knighthood. And big changes. And I say..go play with a different, "modern" knighthood. This isnt meant as mean, but I almost feel like starting a petition "Keep the Knights of Solamnia as Knights of Solamnia, not the Knights of Modern Thinking of Goodness and Morality Who Can Do What They Want As Long As It Is Good". The ideals, traditions, and people are what make the Knights of Solamnia what they are. You change it too much, they arent that anymore. I realize theres room for improvement, but sheesh.
Also I'm saying they should work WITH them, not incorporate them.
I think everyone means that as well.
I also have nothing but contempt for the Harpers.
Errr I mean Legion of Steel
And the Knights don't have to change. Indeed, they have gone to great lengths to resist change.
They were nearly wiped out as result but there is no reward for ignoring the realities of life.
The Wizards of High Sorcery haven't needed clerics or warriors because they do not purport to be what the Knights do: leaders of the people.
With their narrow focus, the Knights have many times been very poor leaders for their people, and their current situation reflects that.
If you're an organization with a very narrow focus you can afford to be specialized. You only need to know about things that directly relate to your area of specialization. Even then you can still run into serious problems, as the wizards did when their lack of diplomatic skills helped feed a propoganda campaign that nearly led to their destruction.
By the way, the Knights as a historical organization were very religious right up until the time of Kingpriest. I might point out that the Knights of the Sword are a clerical order of Knighthood and the leader of that branch is supposed to be a cleric on par with other high priests in the Holy Orders of the Stars. The problem in Istar was that the Knighthood ceded that role to the Istaran church and things went straight to the Abyss. Literally I might add.
For the Knights to not only survive, but to perform the duty they are supposed to be doing, they need to return to an open mind, and learn a little from history. Huma accomplished much of what he did thanks to the help of his wizard friend Magius.
Indeed, what's ironic here is that I keep hearing about "changes" to the Knighthood when what is really be asked for is that they learn from their own history.
The Knights don't have to re-align their whole organization to take advantage of the benefits of accepting the help that many White Robe wizards would be more than happy to give them. For pity's sake even King Arthur kept a wizard around for when he needed magical advice! Likewise, reestablishing their clerical ties would actually be more of a case of returning to their roots than taking on changes.
You see, the Knighthood as depicted in the Chronicles was not truly the Knighthood as it was for most of it's history. It was a Knighthood that had just emerged from centuries of dark ages and was more than a little directionless. It took idealists like Lord Gunthar and Sturm to snap them out of it and remind them of what they were supposed to be.
This is the thread filled with more believers the 'Knights of the Old Measure are the best in the entire world' than I've ever seen so I think most of your post is fantastically wrong.
Also I'm saying they should work WITH them, not incorporate them.
I think everyone means that as well.
I also have nothing but contempt for the Harpers.
Errr I mean Legion of Steel
Well, the reasoning for this belief is simple. If you look at the current incarnation of the KoS, they are basically the same as the LoS. There is very little difference. Under the Old Measure, the KoS were unique, but under the Revised Measure, they simply don't feel honorable. As it has been mentioned on this thread, it currently feels like the KoS have an "end justifies means" mentality which is just not honorable. It simply doesn't fit. I think that what the Revisions need is some definition. It seems from the novels that the Revisions allowed Knights more freedom in situations in which there is no clear path. Thus, when opened to interpretation, it justifies the use of espionage, ambushing, and otherwise underhanded, and hence, dishonorable tactics. When the Revisions were made, they weren't made perfectly, they needed specifications and left too much room for interpretation, a flaw common in the real world as well. Also, Revising the Measure should be a very difficult action to perform. Otherwise, amendments would happen often, and keeping up with the changes would be impossible. Also, when analyzing what parts of the Measure support the Knighthood and what parts hinder it, one must keep in mind the underlying moral principles. If one doesn't, then major changes would happen that would compromise the very philosophical foundation on which the Measure is based. It appears to me that these hibitions were not considered when the Measure was revised.
1) The Knighthood needs to reinvigorate the Knights of the Sword, who had been largely symbolic during the Age of Despair and never fully got rebuilt during the brief time before Takhisis stole the world. That would reestablish a clerical presence in the Order that was part of it's original design and helped provide some divine guidance.
2) The notion of auxilliaries, like the current wizardly one is a good one and should be expanded upon. The Knights could enourage White Robe wizards (especially ones from Solamnia) to participate in the Knights endeavors and provide magical advice to the Knightly circles.
3) It's all about focus groups. The Knights need to make sure they are keeping abreast of how the rest of the world feels about them. Often the only counsel they keep is their own, and the opinions even of their own people are treated as irrelevant. It's not an accident that the people of their former capital Solanthus are perfectly content to not be ruled by the Knights any longer.
4) Make discussions more open. Closed-door sessions of Knightly circles breeds atmospheres of dubious politics. The body of Knights, along with trusted allies, need to be more engaged in discussions of the direction of the Knighthood.
5) Accomplishments mean more than empty virtue. Remeber why the Measure exists to begin with and judge it's performance against how well those goals are being met. If people are being slaughtered by ogres because Knights are debating whether the Measure allows them to cross the road then there clearly is a disconnect here.
6) Remember that the writers of the Measure were not prophets. It is unrealistic to imagine that people who lived in the past could anticipate every situation their descendents would face. This is why in the real world we are constantly revising our body of law.
5) Accomplishments mean more than empty virtue. Remeber why the Measure exists to begin with and judge it's performance against how well those goals are being met. If people are being slaughtered by ogres because Knights are debating whether the Measure allows them to cross the road then there clearly is a disconnect here.
6) Remember that the writers of the Measure were not prophets. It is unrealistic to imagine that people who lived in the past could anticipate every situation their descendents would face. This is why in the real world we are constantly revising our body of law.
I think that what may be forgotten here is a sense of balance. Yes, accomplishments do mean something, but accomplishment without virtue is just as empty as virtue without accomplishment. The one needs the other. This is the nature of honor. If the Knights are debating on whether or not to help other people, then it is clear that the Knights in charge have no concept of virtue and honor. And yes, change can be good, but it can also be terrible. Given the option, changes can be made to a body of law which is not benficial to those who must abide by it. Hence, change must be tempered by tradition. There is a reason as to why traditions are the way they are. Ancestors didn't simply say, "This is the way it is because I say so." There was a purpose for their policy decisions, which are still relevant to this day. Simply because traditions are older does not mean they do not deserve the same respect one would give to new ideas.
When I say "accomplishments" I mean actual beneficial actions.
Empty virtue is when you sit around doing nothing but look good. It's the same deal as with the elves, who spent a lot of time boasting about how Good they were, yet were largely unwilling to actually do anything Good that didn't directly benefit themselves.
Preserving one's traditions while mayhem erupts all around you is not an accomplishment. The Knights have a habit of being rather complacent and then getting blind-sided by major evils like the Knights of Takhisis that emerged while they were off polishing their armor.
Also note that I am encouraging the Knights to look at their historic exemplars for some of their guidance in managing the Measure. Remember that they, as a group, are borne of rebellion not conservativism. If Vinas Solamnus had accepted the argument that law and tradition are paramount then Solamnia would never have existed. Huma likewise bucked "tradition" in numerous ways, but did so in a circumstance where it was truly needful. Sturm did likewise.
The key is appreciating that history tends to move in dramatic spurts and to be prepared to act during those events.
During the Age of Despair the Knights had a slow, but steady climb to reestablish their lost stature. Under those circumstances stability and consistency were more useful than during the War of the Lance, when the world was changing very rapidly. During that time the Knights were looking to the politics of recent years for guidance when they really should have been looking to the legacy of Huma for direction instead.
Occasionally drastic changes are needed, but when these extreme measures are needed is not clear. If one truly researches history, then one will find that history does not move in sudden dramatic spurts often. Rather, when change happens, it does so slowly, often taking much planning and the efforts of many people.
I think if one truly researches history, one will be surprised at how many truly bizarre, poorly-decided and throughly mistaken choices were made by people at all levels of power, from emperors and kings to fishermen and peasants. It would be nice to think that individuals with the greatest impact on history make sensible decisions, but I doubt you'll find as many of those as you will find the consequences of ignorance and stupidity.
Cheers,
Cam
This is why the 20th Century, for example, is defined largely by it's wars. WWI & WWII dramatically altered the map, changed cultural values, redesigned global economy and even impacted social and religious thought and in each instance did so within a few short years.
The problem for the Knights hasn't been so much a question of even-handed versus under-handed tactics. It has been a question of sitting around puzzling over the Measure like lawyers when they were supposed to be out in the field acting like Knights.
Indeed, it is often their failure to do what they do best that has been at the heart of the problem. I said before the Knights are supposed to be the vanguard of the forces of Good. That means leading the way, not bringing up the rear after other people have already been fighting the battle.
During the War of the Lance, the Knights, like the elves, were stuck in a more inwards-focused position where they were too confused by politics and legalities to take effective action. Obviously that's bad. Knights are, after all, supposed to be warriors not lawyers and one imagines that an effective military machine should be able to act in a decisive and organized fashion when a threat rears it's head.
I personally see nothing wrong with the Knights consulting what is and isnt right in the Measure. The Measure wasn't made on some whim with some rules that were vaguely good or just neat. That thing was made huge so that it could cover a lot of territory. Yes maybe it can't cover everything, but nothing can so its an impossible task. I *like* the fact that the Knights have such an extensive body of books to look over and reference. Too many times the only thing people have to reference is their own thoughts, feelings, and experiences. While all that is nice, I think its great when you have a book that covers specific examples of things that can happen and gives a code of conduct on how you must act. No one knight can say "well I dont believe like that so I dont do it" or something. They have a code they live by, even written down. If people dont like that, then they shouldnt join the KoS. I actually hated seeing the Measure get revised into a "pamphlet". Yes it needed changes, thousands of years will do that. But not a rehaul and drastic shortening.
I dunno as I said its not like the Knights couldnt do anything and just were dumb. Maybe they didnt do "optimal" performance, but than again I can say that about any army there ever has been. Again its easy to say what they should or have to do when we read the books. The flaws in people is what makes the story interesting. Whats happened with the Knights can happen with any organization out there, with dual leadership, one favoring the old way, one favoring a more "modern" way. That actually is an old theme. Obviously the Knights have learned from their mistake, they did so right after the War of the Lance. Thats when they started letting in other races/females and started trying to take a little bit more relaxed view. But I really don't want to see every knight go to the "individual" knight who "bucks the system". That will get old fast and have nothing in common with the KoS I know and love.
I see this as very similar to the way people in the real world endlessly debate the contents of the Bible. Those debates will probably never be resolved because the Bible is a complex document, often referencing historical concepts that modern readers may not fully understand, using archaic language. Naturally, in the real world these debates for the reason there is a fragmented Christian religion that cannot agree on the finer points of doctrine.
Likewise, the Knights are often hobbled by a massive document that does attempt to cover everything, and as a result inevitably comes into conflict with itself when situations that are not clear-cut come into play or has holes in it when wholly unforeseen events happen.
Forgive me but I prefer my Knights to be heroes, not attorneys.
The Knights of Steel are for you. They don't follow a Measure or any kind of document, they just mainly get orders from their leaders. They are encouraged to be indivuduals and take care of problems they way they want. They accept everyone, be you wizard, sorceror, rogue, fighter, cleric, mystic, etc. They do have fighters, or "knights", so you'll be happy with that all the while pandoring to every other class. They can go out in massive force, or work behind the scenes and do what is "right" without worrying about what their elders think "far away" because if you cant get ahold of your superiors quickly, then you should just do whatever you think is best and not worry about it.
Again, start looking at the Knights of the Steel. I think my Knights of Solamnia just fine, albeit they could use one or two things to "freshen them up". Glad to see they allow non-nobles, females, and other races(well mainly half-elves). I like to see the tradition in them and the break down of the different orders. I totally see the reasoning of the three orders - soldiers, clerics/spiritualists, and commanders. The Auxialry Mage is a nice touch, but I dont want them as a permanent branch of the Solamnics. I think it makes them a little different when not every knighthood or group has the same breakdown time after time... fighter, cleric, mage... fighter, cleric, mage... fighter, cleric, mage. I like the honor, tradition, the building off their forefathers (by interpreting the Measure). I like the Measure thatd escribes how a Knight should act and the things he should do. If you take that away, they are justa group of individuals who all "believe in good", but will all do things how they want it. I like the fact that if a superior gives a knight a command, they are expected to follow it, not sit around and wonder.. "well do I believe this is right..". Discipline is a great thing. Do you think our soldiers get to ask themselves.. "well do I really want to go to Iraq... maybe I dont believe its right.. nah I wont go.."
I'll grant you this, nongood people may rise up in the knighthood. Maybe they won't see good as the ultimate expression. But any organization has had and will have these instances occurr. Thats why there are procedures for getting them out of there, all the while there being lots of tests to get there so that it doesnt happen too frequent. And you say.. well it takes so long to just get rid of someone. Well yea, because if you didnt make it like that people would get rid of people all the time if they just didnt agree with their ideas or policies. Look at our Constitution.. its dang hard to get past a veto by the President. 2/3 vote. And that isnt easy to come by. Is it stupid because it takes a lot of effort to get by? Yes maybe some "good" things will get passed up, or "bad" things happen, but the laws are there so it doesnt happen all the time. Its the greater good that sometimes needs to prevail, not always the immediate. Some people may not like that, but thats how it is. I don't want to be part of an organization that every member is allowed to decide how he/she wants to do an action because do you realize how many conflicts can arise? The Knighthood is simple, if you don't like how they act (and its written plainly in the Measure), then don't join them. End of story. Not a very hard concept. And The Knights of Steel are there to pick up the "individuals" who want to "do good their own style".
I think people are misunderstanding what I meant by stressing that the Measure into a code of conduct for a knight. I would like to emphasize that I wish to strip away the legalistic aspects of it (allowing the knights to cover it with other works) and make it into a philosophical one. That is, to define the spirit behind knightly morality. An example I suggested is the Nicomechean Ethics. Inside this philosophical work is suggestions like "the mean between two actions or emotions is often the correct one" and "the key to a moral life is the cultivation of moral virtue within the person himself (it is most important to have your heart in the right place). It does not deal with the specific actions. No philosophical ethical work does this, though they may use examples to illustrate the principles they have come up with.
Look at pages 56, 57, and 58 of the DLCS. The sidebars deal with the Measures of the Crown, Sword, and Rose Knights. They do not deal with specific actions, but rather general actions (ie. obey your family, obey your superior officers) based on the virtues of Loyalty, Faith, and Justice.
If the Measure is a philosophical work, a document which defines the spirit of the very knighthood, you have to assume these things
1) It does not require extensive revision often. The principles embody the spirit of the law, not the laws themselves. The principles can be considered timeless.
2) If you change or revise the Measure you are essentially changing and revising the philosophy of the Knighthood.
3) If the Measure has frequently been debated and added to (as we know it has) then it is actually a collection of philosophy. You might think of it for example as a body comprising all the works by the pre-eminent Platonists and Neoplatonists for several centuries. It would be an impressive body of work in itself, but perhaps a bit to much for a knight to absorb as a heroic soldier. I can thus see the desire to simply cut it back to Plato himself, keeping the rest as meditations.
To bring this completely to Krynn, you have Vinas Solamnus the ethical philosopher and all the other knight-philosophers who came after him. Gunthar uth Wistan puts into motion the revision of the measure. A Grand Council to decide what the core principles of the Knighthood are. There is a flurry of debate, long disagreement, flared tempers, and many bitter disgruntled people. Ariakan (founder of the Knights of Neraka) witnesses this and rather than seeing a healthy intellectual and spiritual process, instead sees a lot of bickering. He determines that what they really need is somebody to tell them what to do. He drafts the Code, which can be basically boiled down to "What is just is what Takhisis and the Lord of the Night say is just".
Thirty years later, the measure is unveiled by Liam Ehrling, which came about through consensus (which is why it took 30 years!). It didn't please everybody, but they could live with it and it was a collection of core principles which was accessible to everyone. A person, with a couple years of education (along with their combat training) could be expected to memorize it and incorporate it into their thinking.
Then (and this is very important) we have to assume that due to the inflated responsibilities of the KoS (filling the power vacuum left behind by the collapsing Dragon Empire of Neraka) they allowed people into the ranks that were not trained and educated by the Knighthood. By the time of the Chaos War, this problem was exacerbated, so that not only were un-knightly candidates in the Knighthood, they were also recruiting and directing them. That is how you get the shadowy cabal that directs Linsha, and Linsha herself.
If you want me to like Liam Ehrling, then you have to allow him to try to do something about this. To start choking back the selection of Knights to young boys and girls who will be professionally trained to fight like knights, and spiritually trained to live up to the knighthood's heroic ideals. (You can still have people join the knighthood later, but they are the exception rather than the norm and you still have to study for 5-10 years). You say you want heroic knights Psyonix? If they aren't living up to an ideal of chivalry, purity, justice, courtesy, obedience, chastity (not celibacy) and courage... then they aren't heroic Solamnic knights.
We have the Legion of Steel for the everyday heroes. For the good people who are not inspired to to seek a higher standard. For those who think the greatest exaltation is to save as many lives as possible, to be as free as possible, and to be as happy as possible. I'm saying we shouldn't be afraid to write stories and to play characters in the Legion of Steel because it is new. We shouldn't be afraid to let the Knights of Solamnia be what many of us admire just because they are older. But it seems that people want to ignore the Legion of Steel, and simply rewrite the Solamnic Knights to be that character archetype. I simply cannot understand it. These differing viewpoints are what makes each unique and special.
I also understand that every organization will have people who seek power within that organization, or will use the rules of that mini-society for their own gain. I understand that there will be some who follow the letter of the law rather than the spirit of it. I understand that there will be some who understand the spirit incorrectly. I understand that there will be some who just don't care.
We have clerics in Krynn which are allowed to live up to a spiritual ideal, a disciplined ideal, and ideal of humility, and ideal of obedience. Sure we see a few Quaraths, but you can expect that most clerics will be depicted as being good if they follow a good god. That's the real problem with the way the Knights are being written. If they are white knights, they are not heroic. Only the gritty, grim and gray heroes are.
As for the whole debate about whether history "progresses" because of individuals or because of group action, I think you're all wrong. The idea of history being "the ascent of man" or "the march of progress" is a construct that we northern Europeans have constructed to glorify our own society. After all, aren't we the pinacle of this intellectual, moral, spiritual and technological progress? You want to know the origins of this thinking, go back to Imperialist 19th century. You'll find Hegel, Weber, Muller, and many others who loved this "evolutionary" theory of history. You want to think like them, be my guest. I'll privately think you're an parochial boob, which shouldn't sit well with you coming from a right-wing, regionalist prairie hillbilly.
Secondly, individuals and great masses of people both bring about change. You can give examples about which is more influential to the end of time. You have your Alexander's, Iulius Caesar's, Charlemagnes, Cromwell's and so on, which is good for the memorization of names and dates. You also have the inventions of the stirrups and horse collars, the growth of new religious movements, sociological trends, climate change, and the movements of populations. The true student of history, as someone was arrogant enough to claim, might want to consider that.
Many of the essential elements of the system work properly if executed upon as they were intended.
For example, once the pointless limitations on gender and noble blood were removed the Knighthood otherwise has a functioning system of recruitment. The use of squires training under active Knights, participating in the various functions that will be expected of them as Knights is an excellent system of apprenticeship (and also works well as an adventure hook). Generally speaking I do not believe that you can train Knights en masse the way that you do common soldiers. Their role requires a certain level of personal attention that cannot be done on an assembly line.
Likewise, the spiritual aspects of Knighthood are essential. This was the piece that became broken during the Reign of Istar and is still being recovered. Previously the Knights of the Sword were the clerical arm of the Order and were dedicated to making sure that the Knighthood was pursuing the goals of the Gods of Light. When this role was handed off to the Istaran church things went downhill. During the Age of Despair this branch of the Knighthood had more of ceremonial aspect rather than a true spiritual one. Ultimately the Knights are meant to serve the Good gods, who in turn seek to protect and aid mortals. It was reassigning this focus to a humanist system (the Kingpriest) that broke it in the first place.
The other valid elements of the Measure cover chivalrous conduct. The Knights are instructed by the Measure towards courteous and honorable behavior towards women, the disabled, etc. This is where the Knights have the philosophy of their personal behavior outlined such that they maintain respect (both given and received).
These elements make sense in defining a Knightly identity and code of personal behavior suitable to a chivalrous order.
What the Measure is not suitable for is defining political relationships, writing battle plans or staging wars.
Obviously things like not slaughtering civilians or engaging in scorched-earth warfare can be covered under precepts of honorable conduct. Likewise unworthy behaviors like using magic to enhance one's prowess before duel can be banned, except in cases of obvious inequity (having to duel a dragon for example).
By the way True Blue, it's the Legion of Steel, not the Knights of Steel. For pity's sake read the game books.
Mind you, I'm not so sure what it is you are defending other than the bitter, cynical Knighthood that existed in the early Chronicles. It almost sounds as if you're nostalgic for the days when the Knights were more concerned about internal politics than about what was going on in the world.
I, for one, am not arguing that the Knights become a bunch of spies, assassins or even wizards. Indeed, I think they made a great mistake with the assignment that they gave Linsha. They should stay out of the skullduggery business, as they're not any good at it. They can, however, subcontract certain work (like arcane magical support) to auxilliaries, which is what they are starting to do.
But again I'm a Sturm Brightblade fan, whereas you seem to be more of a Derek Crownguard type, hence the disparity in viewpoints,
But you have to remember, Sturm was never a Knight until the end. He was an adventurer, squire, and traveler for most of his life. Actually only being a squire a few years. This man wasn't around the Knighthood and didnt have to deal with the things that go into an organization that is a country and has thousands upon thousands of people to deal with and do things for. I think everyone would benefit from his loutlook because it was positive and courteous.
It just seems too many people want to change the Knighthood to be more modern. Now maybe you dont want to go to drastic changes. I guess I'd rather see the individuals change more than I would the organization. I agree, it has some bad points in it. They relaxed the restrictions on joining and I think that helped. You will start to see other views in the knighthood, not just the rich human male opinions. And I do think that the Measure should be cleaned up a little . But I still believe that it is a good system and does a lot of nice things. I dont think it should be chucked for a small pamphlet giving everyone the right to choose what they think is right. That kind of autonomy isnt a part of the knighthood.
While Derek is an example of a Knight who maybe went by the Measure a little bit too literal, its bad form to assume that all knights do the same and that the Measure is just broken. Any group anywhere will have "bad" members, you cannot stop that. It *will* happen. I think maybe the Measure should try to be cleaned up and added provisions to try to cut this down. But it doesnt matter, any rules or doctrine you take, there will be a person who will try to use it to do what *the* want by using the literal translation of it. It doesnt mean that you cant have this kind of document. You just need to guard against the twisting of it as much as you can.
I think too often that a person is singled out in an organization and they are shown as to why the organization doesnt work. Derek showing the Measure "sucks" is like saying Raistlin is an example of why the Conclave and WoHS "suck" and need to be redone. These things happen and should be cut down with as much as possible, but it will never be perfect.
What do I want to see? I want to be shown Knights who follow the Oath and Measure, doing good, and showing the chivrolous ideals that the knighthood was founded on. And I think its possible with the old measure and even the new measure. I dont want "cloak and dagger" knights or new age knights who think they automatically know better than their superiors so they do the "good" they want. I want the miltary, disciplined, chivrolous, knight going around doing good according to the Oath he says and the Measure he follows. Take away the Measure.. and hes just another person trying to do good. The Measure is what tells how the knight should act.
Now I realize that you arent advocating the getting rid of the Measure. But I hate to see so many changes in the Measure that it would become unrecognizable. And eventually the new Knights of Solamnia won't even seem related to the old Knights of Solamnia. I want the discipline, the rules, and the codes to back up the person and the organization.
They have never been represented in the novels as an organization without that flaw, and this is why some people have complained about them. I personally welcome their role in the setting in this way, as I do any organization which on the most basic level attempts to be the paragon of virtue, honor and courage and yet by the very nature of the universe, cannot help but be fraught with individuals like Derek who miss the point.
My problem isn't that those individuals exist--it's that they dominate and define the Knighthood in every 'major setting event' ever written. However, I'm not sure if that's a problem with the setting, or with me.
Matthew L. Martin
Actually I'm a Huma Dragonbane fan. A product of the Knighthood who was a member of the Knighthood, lived under the Knighthood, and did right by the Knighthood. Lord Gunther, the Lady Knight and her brother in the "Reign of Ishtar", Sturm Brightblade (who was a Knight in spirit even if he wasn't formally recognized for most of his life), The Knight from the short Tale who befriended the Minotaur....the numbers are fairly consistent throughout the group.
Oddly Vinus Solamnius doesn't fall under my "ideal" of a knight.
The Knights of Solamnia however, in these other books are fairly consistent in the fact they are
* Courteous
* Bound by a code they believe in
* Stoic
* Noble (in the classical sense)
* Bound by rules that may not make sense to outsiders but are PART OF WHO THEY ARE (the Minotaur story had the minotaur questioning whether a knight would attack a man from behind)
We can presume that the Knights who accompanied Steel Brightblade and the other "Good" knights of Takhasis against Chaos were the same Measure bound holy warriors that I think are the ideal of the knighthood.
Ironically, Derek, LORD SOTH, Rennard, and "Behind the Mask"'s Verminaard are only effective in part because the Oath and the Measure make it so perfectly clear that these men KNOW better. The contrast to the "old knighthood" causes their descent to have that much more impact.
Lord Soth is tragic because he lives by the measure even in death, hating it and yet still feeling love for it as well (much like his wife). At his worst, the Measure has made Lord Soth a cut above the average scumbag like Lord Krell in Amber and Ashes who isn't worth his salt as a Death Knight.
The Knights of Takhasis are effective only under Lord Arikan and to a lesser extent the Minotaurs because they are effectively very close to the Knights of Solamnia in spirit.
People who are not "good" alone but are strictly good and do things not in their self interests necessarily (i.e. fight fair and don't employ certain tactics) because they draw strength from that civility.
I think of Lord Krell as something of exactly of what I see as the problem with the Knights now and I don't just mean the Knights of Solamnia but Takhasis too.
Lord Krell is evil, that's his purpose. He's good at it. He's not a KNIGHT OF TAKHASIS though and all that such implies. The honorable nature of the Knights elevated them as villains. Without the stringent code they are supposed to follow, the Knights of Nekara just plain suck.
Ditto for why I find the Harpers...errr...dangit I mean Legion of Steel problematic. I honestly think I'd like it more if the Legion were patronized by Branchelea and had more "history" and "nobility" to them but its just plain ridiculous to name an organization after a man who lived his life by a goddess and to ideals that are completely lacking in his followers.
On how to properly revise the Measure, I stand with my earlier comments. That change is indeed a good thing. But antiquity must be used to keep change from happening to rapidly for the KoS to be effective, and change must be used to stop antiquity from keeping the KoS from moving with the world in which they exist.
And I must give congratulations. You have made one of your own who was trying to debate this with you as an equal, feel offended and unwelcome. This is the first time that has happened. Congratulations.
That change is indeed a good thing.
I'd argue it is in and of itself, completely indifferent. Some changes are good, others bad.
And I must give congratulations. You have made one of your own who was trying to debate this with you as an equal, feel offended and unwelcome. This is the first time that has happened. Congratulations.
Yeah sorry, I have an extremely caustic attitudes towards theories of history. I actually had taken a lot of acid out of my comments and toned down how I truly felt. The problem with evolutionary views of history is that they generally tell more about us than history itself. We have the view that mankind has predestined to perform certain actions as long as we imput the right stimulus. We do this by selectively picking certain examples of history to reinforce this theory of mankind. We use it to justify saying things like: "The person is smart, people are stupid." "You're living in the past", "The modern world is an enlightened world", etc.
Well guess what. People have free will, and thus have control over their own emotions and actions. They make choices that are influenced by stimuli, but not absolutely. A society or individual will make one choice in a crisis that another will not. A society will embrace changes or try to rigidly maintain the status quo even if the same things are happening under the surface. You can find out about the person and societies involved by studying the events, but you cannot come up with a universal theory of mankind and his nature by selectively picking historical events that match each other.
So yeah, I'll gladly tear apart any philosophy of history anyone wishes to construct. Thus, I'm glad that you're offended, though sorry if you feel unwelcome.
Anyway, like I said I wanted to take the debate away from notions of the philosophy of history, and towards the practical of what the measure actually contains. That's where I started at the beginning of this thread anyway.
The issue is over what the Measure ought to cover versus what it actually does.
Indeed, that's why I started the thread with exactly that. Nobody seems to be commenting on this though. Either because they agree that it should be nailed down as a philosophical work espousing the spirit of the knighthood, or they just don't understand what I'm saying.
For example, once the pointless limitations on gender and noble blood were removed the Knighthood otherwise has a functioning system of recruitment. The use of squires training under active Knights, participating in the various functions that will be expected of them as Knights is an excellent system of apprenticeship (and also works well as an adventure hook). Generally speaking I do not believe that you can train Knights en masse the way that you do common soldiers. Their role requires a certain level of personal attention that cannot be done on an assembly line.
Indeed, this is a problem for all three knightly orders. The KoS are calvary troops and military commanders. The Legion of Steel are elite agents. They have militias and auxillaries to fill out the rank and file.
Likewise, the spiritual aspects of Knighthood are essential.
I actually agree with you (I think it was you) who said that the Sword Knights should be mystics who serve the Order rather than Kiri-Jolith. I agree that the Church of Kiri-Jolith is simply displaced otherwise. Myself, I would make them mystics that served all the gods of light, especially now that Auxillary Mages are part of the Solamnic Knight forces.
The other valid elements of the Measure cover chivalrous conduct. The Knights are instructed by the Measure towards courteous and honorable behavior towards women, the disabled, etc. This is where the Knights have the philosophy of their personal behavior outlined such that they maintain respect (both given and received).
I don't mind the revision to the measure as such. I mind how it was done, when it was done, and why it was done. If there have been previous revisions to the measure before, a grand council did the revision over a few decades, and it was done for clarity rather than to try to "fix" the knighthood... then I have no problem with the revised measure. I also expect to still see the stuff that was cut from the measure around in some form.
What the Measure is not suitable for is defining political relationships, writing battle plans or staging wars.
Though I think it may have some stuff in it like Sun Tzu's "The Art of War" ;)
Mysticism, in my opinion, is far better suited to the Legion of Steel than to the Knights of Solamnia. The Legion has the more humanist focus of the two and is less interested higher powers. The Knights on the other hand were originally (before the Kingpriest) a more pious Order.
So I actually do endorse the heavy presence of the Kiri-Jolith's guidance and clerics in the Knighthood. Mystics are too inwardly-focused. A Mystic can pretty much do whatever they please without concern for any higher authority (indeed, thats exactly how the Knights of the Skull work).
Yeah sorry, I have an extremely caustic attitudes towards theories of history. I actually had taken a lot of acid out of my comments and toned down how I truly felt. The problem with evolutionary views of history is that they generally tell more about us than history itself. We have the view that mankind has predestined to perform certain actions as long as we imput the right stimulus. We do this by selectively picking certain examples of history to reinforce this theory of mankind. We use it to justify saying things like: "The person is smart, people are stupid." "You're living in the past", "The modern world is an enlightened world", etc.
Well guess what. People have free will, and thus have control over their own emotions and actions. They make choices that are influenced by stimuli, but not absolutely. A society or individual will make one choice in a crisis that another will not. A society will embrace changes or try to rigidly maintain the status quo even if the same things are happening under the surface. You can find out about the person and societies involved by studying the events, but you cannot come up with a universal theory of mankind and his nature by selectively picking historical events that match each other.
So yeah, I'll gladly tear apart any philosophy of history anyone wishes to construct. Thus, I'm glad that you're offended, though sorry if you feel unwelcome.
Anyway, like I said I wanted to take the debate away from notions of the philosophy of history, and towards the practical of what the measure actually contains. That's where I started at the beginning of this thread anyway.
Obviously, you've missed the point. If you noticed, earlier in the same post of mine you quoted, I made the note to point out that I never said progress, but changes, showing that I have never supported the evolutionary view of history. What offended me was the fact that you are so arrogant yourself that you made a split-second decision about me and my views, which if you had actually been paying attention to my arguments, and were thinking before you responded, you would see that there was no basis for your decision about what type of person I was. This says to me that you are simply projecting aspects of your own personality that you do not appreciate onto other people unjustly. This is a common flaw.
Now the gods seem to accept that there will be some dispute amongst their mortal worshippers. Just because the elves and humans both worship the Gods of Light doesn't always (or even usually) mean that they will march to the same drum beat.
So presumably it is still concievable that the Knights and the Ergothian church of Corij (Kiri-Jolith) could have a disagreement of direction over their two nations. That happens and the gods seem to accept that. It is less of an issue within Solamnia because historically the Knights of the Sword were the church of Kiri-Jolith within their own nation. The big problem during the time of the Kingrpiest was that the Knights allowed the center of clerical power to leave their Knighthood and shift under the purview of Istar, which they should not have done.
The only thing I do disagree with is the continued clerical progression of the Knights of the Rose. That makes no sense to me. I've always felt that it was the Order of the Sword that should be the most "clerical" of the Orders. The "lower" Order of the Crown was naturally the more numerous, militant branch. And of course the Knights of the Rose are the branch that partakes of the experiences of both Orders but is focused on the broader goals of the Knighthood.
I dont see the removing of making them "clerics" as modernizing or changing them. Basically I advocate the getting rid of the requirement that you have to be a cleric to become a KoS. Which amazingly is done in the new War of the Lance sourcebook. The KoS then gain spells *like* a cleric, but they arent officially clerics. That means yes they pay homage to Kiri-Jolith, Habbakuk, and Paladine, but arent exactly clerics in their churches. They are seen as spiritual members and their opinions matter, but they arent "full clerics". I think this would help distinguish the KoS from clerics of Kiri-Jolith. I dont think they should be one in the same. The clerics of Kiri-Jolith form their church and do things the way they see the church should. The KoS follow the Oath and Measure, pay homage to Kiri-Jolith, and do good according to *their* ideals, meaning the knighthood. Basically we just both see it different ways and I really dont foresee either one of us convincing eachother otherwise, althought it is a good conversation.
Yea the Rose's getting spellcasting I see as just plain dumb. It looks like one person instituted it in SAGA, and the designers just decided to keep that one mechanic.. when there is no other sources showing examples of when it happened. The Knight of the Rose prestige class is horrible broken and takes away the thunder from the Knight of the Sword. As I've said in other threads, the Knight of the Sword is just a lazy PrC. It looks like the designers just didnt feel like coming up with any unique abilities for them, thus just transplanting the cleric class onto the KoS PrC. I feel the same way with the noble draconians, which is why I dont like them. It looks like theyw ere just lazy and instead of coming up with neat things to make them different... they just added class levels. Kind of..unoriginal. I would have liked to see the Knight of the Rose get more "commander" effects. Benefits that help allies. This would make Crown as soldiers, Swords as spiritual warriors(clerics if you prefer them that way), and the Roses as the commanders.
Remember that Mysticism is new. It has never existed previously and so the Knights could not have used it in previous ages. Their religious focus was always on Paladine, Kiri-Jolith and Habbakuk (usually in that order). They were never very focused on the worship of Branchala, Majere, Mishakal or Solinari, all of whom had their own orders of clerics (or wizards in Solinari's case). It is not possible in Dragonlance to worship an abstract force or engage in pantheonic worship unless you're a Mystic.
Also note that I specifically referenced their role as being within Solamnia. However, the High Clerist (note the inference in that title) that led the Order of the Sword was generally only second to the Prophet of Paladine in the hierarchy of religious leaders in Ansalon.
Thus the Knights had an internal clerical arm rather than relying on an external one.
On Sword Knights - I could see three options which would be suitable to me.
1) The Knights of the Sword become the Solamnic Arm of the Church of Kiri-Jolith. The High Clerist is effectively the head of the Solamnic church. However, I would have to see the Solamnics bottled up in Solamnia for that to happen, instead of spread across Ansalon. I seem to be the only one who wants to do that (to make way for other homegrown knighthoods and military orders to arise).
2) The Knights of the Sword are mystics which worship all the gods, and are thus seperate from the Holy Order of the Stars. Thus, a player who wants to be a Cleric of Kiri-Jolith won't feel like he is being displaced or less important.
3) The new Knights of Solamnia class has special abilities that grant minor healing and buffing spell-like abilities, but no true spellcasting powers.
I dont see why the Knights of the Sword can't just get clerical spells, but not technically *be* clerics. If there is a cleric of Kiri-Jolith who wants to join the knighthood, than he would advance in levels of spellcasting when taking the KoS PrC. But if justa regular knight becomes a Knight of the Sword, than he gains a certain amount of spells from Kiri-Jolith and Habakkuk because of his dedication to the knighthood and homage to the two patron gods of the Knights of Solamnia. I *do not* want every Knight of the Sword to be a cleric of Kiri-Jolith. To me that is just stupid, but again.. my opinion. Everyone already thinks that Knights of Solamnia replace paladins, do you need them to replace clerics of Kiri-Jolith too? I think its dumb that they supposedly replace paladins too, but whatever...
Now consider the structure of the Solamnic Knighthood. The Knights of the Crown are the "lowest" Order in principle, although in practice Crown Knights can advance to leadership roles within the Knighthood. Crown Knights do not cast clerical spells unless they were already members of a clerical class. A Crown Knight that isn't interested in spirituality can choose not to switch to the next Order, remaining a Fighter/Crown indefinitely. This makes up the majority of the Knighthood. These Knights are noble warriors, but their main focus is on combat skills not spirituality. That role belongs to...
The Knights of the Sword. The clerical arm of the Orders, Sword Knights do have to have divine spellcasting abilities, as this is one of the primary roles of their Order. Now, for those that complain about the unfairness of Sword Knights versus regular clerics of Kiri-Jolith need to bear in mind that this is a prestige class, and the Sword Knight has to meet stricter requirements than a cleric, who is really getting off easy all things considered. Conflicts between the Knightly church and non-Knightly church may occur, but will probably be in places where the Knights don't rule anyway (like Ergoth or Abanasinia).
The only real problem here are the Knights of the Rose, who continue the spellcasting progression as they gain class levels. This seems a little problematic to me, as I would be inclined to rule that Knights with a bent for spirituality would remain with the Order of the Sword. Indeed, I would think that this would be the main reason anyone remains a Sword Knight long enough to become High Clerist rather than advance to the Order of the Rose. If they had to sacrifice some divine spellcasting progression that would make a good explanation, but unfortunately that wasn't what the designers opted for.
Habbakuk has never been as strongly revered as his brother I think, except by Knights that travel by sea a great deal. The Knights don't have a lot of rangers although if they did then I could see more reverence for Habbakuk including Ranger/Crown/Sword's dedicated to him. Typically though only one deity is a divine spellcaster's actual patron. Even though Goldmoon prayed to Paladine more than once she was still really a cleric of Mishakal.
The Prestige class reflects the training given to knights include training in piety as well as continuing greater levels of understanding in the ways of law and goodness.
I don't think you should think you should divide the Knights of the Crown, Sword, and Rose into Knights of Nekara like rankings. They are not seperated by function but by the honors bestowed upon those that distinguish themselves.
You can be a Knight of the Rose without clerical training. Tanis half-elven was bestowed the rank because of his role in defeating the Queen of Darkness during the War of the Lance and not going off to become a worthless drunk or living in a desert. I'm sure plenty of Knights of the sword without a suitably pious attitude have been bestowed the honor for their strategic abilities or service (Linsha Majere) but don't possess the skill to handle the "advanced training"
The Knights of the Crown are a group of individuals whom are recruited from the Knights of the Sword and then inducted into "further mysteries." In this respect, they are like the Masonic orders. A Knight of the Crown recieves his first knowledge of paladin like attributes when he is blessed with becoming a Knight of the Sword.
I can't imagine anyone who feels their god's light would want to proceed as a knight of the Rose if it meant turning their back on their god's enlightenment and thus the image of the Knight of the Rose as the perfect god-like knight...a titan of spirituality, physical prowess, and mental agility is rather ruined by the act.
As for the difference between the Clerics of Kiri-Jon and the Knights of Solamnia, yes they are going to be close. They are going to be close in the same manner of Bishop Turpin and Sir Roland are however. The Clerics are spiritual advisors but like the Holy Roman Emperor, the Knights are a divinely ordained aristocracy.
As such they are mere advisors not commanders for them. Power struggles will be interesting though
Then again, during the Age of Despair nobody did really. Check out Derek Crownguard's stats on dragonlance.com. They're not really surprising given the era he lived in. Since most of the PrC abilities are supernatural, and god-granted, during the Age of Despair pretty much all of them were "honorary" Knights who advanced through the Orders based on ritual but never actually had the PrC's.
As for the Rose Knights, it just strikes me that the breadth of their focus, with all the things that they have as responsibilities, that they wouldn't have time to focus on mastering spellcasting, or at least not to the extent that the Sword Knights, who focus on spirituality as the core of their job, do. If I were writing them up I would have at least reduced the Rose Knight spell progression to every other level.
So long as there is the Measure, the Solamnic Knighthood will always fall into the same pitfalls. Ironic since its purpose is to avoid the mistakes of the past.
However, I do think that the Knights of the Rose are usually people VERY good at managing time and exceptional in ways that the other rank and file aren't really.
Hence their boom from Paladine (and Kiri) I suppose
It's a little like the relationship between druids and clerics of Chislev, or rangers and clerics of Habbakuk.
Cheers,
Cam
Asctually, I dont know if this will sound bad, but I think you are wrong Cam. As of right now, in order to get into the Knight of the Sword PrC, you have to be a cleric.
From a game mechanics point of view, yeah. But, consider that many of the Sword knights would have taken fighter levels first, representing their martial training and expertise, then taken Crown knight, and only then picking up that level in cleric to meet the Sword knight requirements. In this case, the cleric levels represent their clerical training under a priest or another Sword knight, rather than joining the Holy Orders as a Revered Son of Kiri-Jolith.
This also reflects the fact that during the early Age of Mortals, when mysticism replaced the power of the gods for the Sword knights, this preliminary training was represented with the mystic class instead of the cleric class.
The War of the Lance variant was intended as a fix, yes, much as the slightly modified WoHS in the Towers of High Sorcery was intended as a fix. However, the PrC in the DLCS is still regarded as the primary version of the class (at least until a Knightly Orders book comes out).
Cheers,
Cam
Again, I think that too much is being made here of the issue between the Holy Orders and the Knights. The two groups are separate, even though they worship the same gods, in exactly the same way that elven clerics of E'li didn't historically feel inclined to take direction from the human church of Paladine.
Becoming a Knight means meeting the requirements of the prestige class, which regular clerics are not required to do. For example, a cleric of Kiri-Jolith can be Lawful Neutral or Neutral Good, but a Knight of the Sword cannot. There are also other requirements in terms of the Knightly trials and other prerequisites.
Within Solamnic lands people are likely to look to the Knights as leaders of their local Kiri-Jolith religion by default it is true. People outside Solamnic lands are not likely to do so. Worship of Habbakuk is likely to be more autonomous of the Knights even with Solamnic lands (although the idea of ranger knights has some appeal...). Since Mishakal is now the de facto leader of the gods of Good there will probably be a strong Holy Orders presence outside the Knighthood. But DLCS is explicit that you cannot be a cleric of multiple gods.
Again, I think that too much is being made here of the issue between the Holy Orders and the Knights. The two groups are separate, even though they worship the same gods, in exactly the same way that elven clerics of E'li didn't historically feel inclined to take direction from the human church of Paladine.
Well, this is very different from DLA. In DLA, and in SAGA's Heroes of Hope, there was a Prophet who was the head of all the faithful of a particular diety, with a Chosen Prophet being the highest ranking cleric of Paladine. This was obviously a direct paralell to Tracy Hickman's own faith, which is headed by a President/Prophet named Gordon B. Hinckley.
http://www.mormon.org/learn/0,8672,1092-1,00.html
Having the direct chosen prophet of a diety means a hiearchical clergy. You might argue that a prophet could be simply the highest level cleric of that faith, with the leader of the church hiearchy possibility being someone else. However... DLA also makes it clear that Prophet is a clerical rank.
Now if we want to retcon this, we certainly can. However, what the prior material says is that the elven priests of Eli would listen to Elistan.
But DLCS is explicit that you cannot be a cleric of multiple gods.
Yep, which is why I said they should be mystics of all the gods. After all, mystics can serve dieties too.
DLA laid out a lot of stuff that has since been discarded, like the 18th level maximum, or the limitations on the number of high-level members in the various Krynn-specific classes (now PrC's). Indeed, I'm not the one tossing a lot of it, Hickman and Weis did in 2E with their Tales of the Lance update.
Elistan also wasn't universally respected by the elves, especially not early on. And even in the days of the Kingpriest some, such as the Silvanesti, were not especially open to having human clerics dictating doctrine within their borders. Not surprising given that their king was a White Robe in defiance of the Kingpriest's doctrine about the evil of wizards.
As for Mystics, it needs to be made clear here, Mystics do not technically serve gods. They serve their own consciences. Their divine abilities are in no way linked to any deity. A Mystic may serve a god today and change their mind about it tomorrow without consequence. As I result I don't think that fits well with the tradition of the Knights of Solamnia. It suits the Knights of Neraka, and even the Legion of Steel, just fine, but not the Solamnics.
It also offers no defense against a return to the kind of self-absorbed Lawful Neutrality that was amok in the Orders up until the War of the Lance.
Feril is a great example. In lake of death, she is undeniably a mystic, but she asks Habbakuk for guidance and strength.
dude, i dont get it. why arent people allowed to pray to gods without having to be devoted loyal servants?
They are allowed to do this. But the gods have a vested interest in the knights of Solamnia and their spiritual development, and the Solamnics likewise consider mysticism to be secondary to clerical magic when both are available.
Cheers,
Cam
In theory the elven wizards are also members of the Orders of High Sorcery. But they don't tolerate Red or Black Robes in their countries nor accept any flack from the Conclave over either that fact or the elven nation's isolationist policies towards other races.
No, but the elves in the conclave don't control the government. As well, the rules of the conclave do not prohibit the antagonism between different robed orders outside of the Towers of High Sorcery. I don't think the comparison is valid in this case.
DLA laid out a lot of stuff that has since been discarded, like the 18th level maximum, or the limitations on the number of high-level members in the various Krynn-specific classes (now PrC's).
That is true. Certainly there has always been regional diety names from the earliest beginnings. Since DLA we have seen the creation of the religions of Khur and Taladas who do not follow the standard pantheon of gods. In Taladas for example, you have the God Hiteh which seems to be a Hiddukel-Chemosh merged diety, or Hiddukel really stepping on Chemosh's toes. So you have gods with different iconography, different aspects, different duties, and different forms of worship.
So having racial and national religions is fine by me, though it may take some difficulty in figuring out who is in charge of the faithful. Is there still a church hiearchy? Is it informal based upon the amount of magical power one holds? Is simply being chosen by a god enough, or is there formal ordination into religious life? After all, the gods can serve as their own religious leaders in a fantasy setting. All they have to do is show up in an avatar.
Personally, I'd like to keep the idea of a "Chosen Prophet" (perhaps as a template) even if we don't have a religious hiearchy. Like Mina with Chemosh or Takhisis.
Yep, definately time for a Holy Order of the Stars book. Or is it Holy Orders of the Stars now? ;)
Elistan also wasn't universally respected by the elves, especially not early on. And even in the days of the Kingpriest some, such as the Silvanesti, were not especially open to having human clerics dictating doctrine within their borders. Not surprising given that their king was a White Robe in defiance of the Kingpriest's doctrine about the evil of wizards.
Yep, but the new Elven clerics came from Elistan and the Plates of Mishakal nonetheless (Joseph Smith and the Golden Tablets of Moroni). Laurana talks about how the elves resisted the human clerics in the War of Souls trilogy, but ultimately accepted Elistan as the god's messenger.
As for Mystics, it needs to be made clear here, Mystics do not technically serve gods. They serve their own consciences. Their divine abilities are in no way linked to any deity.
Well, we aren't exactly sure about whether the powers of clerics are linked to the diety either (see Kingpriest = mystic thread). I do see your point though about mystics not being bound to a diety, even if they might worship one.
There will most certainly be some cross-polination of like-minded clergy, but that is by no means absolute. Even as the Prophet of Paladine Elistan was in no position to dictate terms to the elven nations, or really even the elven churches, however much they might have respected him. This may be a Mormon model, but if you look around today you will find that even the Mormons have their splinter sects that do not obey the commands of the leader of the main faith.
And I agree that we're due a Holy Orders books. It's time to put some gods besides Paladine and Takhisis under the microscope.
As for the Kingpriest, he's a unique case. The rest of his "cleric" followers had had their powers stripped by the gods long before the Cataclysm. It's why "true healing" was becoming distinctive even then. Only a handful of truly pious souls like Denubis still had spells.
My issue with Mystics is a lot like Lady Camilla Weoledge's. I don't hate them or think they're bad people per se. But they do distract somewhat from faith in the gods. Mystics cannot give their full faith to a diety. That's why they can't multi-class as clerics. For groups like the Knights of the Skull this is fine. They don't want to have to answer to any authority higher than themselves. Being Evil that works for them, at least until the Gods of Darkness get bored of the whole thing and decide to squash them.
But the faith of the Knights has always been their surest guard against corruption. When they became more of a humanist organization during the Age of Despair they drifted away from Good and became more Lawful Neutral as they came to rely more on legalities than on divine guidance. Adopting a tepid "we'll worship you because we feel like it, but we don't have to..." kind of position towards the gods seems a sure way to returning to the days of Derek Crownguard.
Kiri-Joniliath's Pontiff lived in the High Clerist's Tower where the Knights of Solamnia were something of a Swiss Guard for him. The Knights supported his faith after all and it was a BIG tower after all.
HOWEVER, a point I'd like to make is the High Clerist would be his annointed Pontiff but there's no way a "underground church" of Minotaurs worshipping him would know of him even if somehow the holy information got to them some other way
(we know that Mishkahal approached others-at least in books outside the canon)
Well consider that the Knights only control the government within Solamnia (or at present within what holdings they still control). Ergoth has it's own church to Corij (Kiri-Jolith). Other places have their's.
Yep, but you can have variation of language and practice within the same hiearchy (Eastern Rite Catholic Churches for example). It is belief that binds religions together. We also know that proper belief is necessary for true clerics (hence the plates of Mishakal and why the Kingpriest was a "special" case).
There will most certainly be some cross-polination of like-minded clergy, but that is by no means absolute. Even as the Prophet of Paladine Elistan was in no position to dictate terms to the elven nations, or really even the elven churches, however much they might have respected him.
To the elven nations I'll agree with. To the elven churches... why not? After all, he did personally convert them.
This may be a Mormon model, but if you look around today you will find that even the Mormons have their splinter sects that do not obey the commands of the leader of the main faith.
Yes, but they are denounced as heretics and excommunicated. So if they are heretics, they aren't really true clerics are they? That's the thing, if they go against the Chosen Prophet, they go against the word of God as spoken by the prophet.
As for the Kingpriest, he's a unique case. The rest of his "cleric" followers had had their powers stripped by the gods long before the Cataclysm. It's why "true healing" was becoming distinctive even then. Only a handful of truly pious souls like Denubis still had spells.
Yes, those who still had true and proper faith. Also a very Mormon idea, because in the Mormon mindset the Catholic church is a "fallen church" or even the "***** of Babylon". A bit annoying to me... but what can you do?
My issue with Mystics is a lot like Lady Camilla Weoledge's. I don't hate them or think they're bad people per se. But they do distract somewhat from faith in the gods. Mystics cannot give their full faith to a diety.
I think this attitude is a reflection of the idea that if you are truly pious, you'll become a cleric. I've known plenty of laypeople or religious brothers/sisters who were just as pious as any ordained cleric. I thus imagine that you can find people who are just as religious as clerics among all classes.
But the faith of the Knights has always been their surest guard against corruption. When they became more of a humanist organization during the Age of Despair they drifted away from Good and became more Lawful Neutral as they came to rely more on legalities than on divine guidance. Adopting a tepid "we'll worship you because we feel like it, but we don't have to..." kind of position towards the gods seems a sure way to returning to the days of Derek Crownguard.
I think holding that attitude is a sign of returning to the days of "we'll have religious faith because it benefits us" kind of ideal. I have plenty of room for mystics among the acolytes and religious communities myself for mystics, with clerics serving as the spiritual leaders.
I don't buy any social engineering argument for fixing the knighthood. The knights will be honourable again when they make the choice to be honourable again. More importantly, when Dragonlance authors want to make a choice to write the Solamnic Knights again.
My objections to the revision of the measure are legal, administrative, and philosophical. I don't buy that a revision of the measure could make the knights heroes to admire, nor the return of the gods. The decisions of the authors is the biggest thing. ;)
That's part of the message that was intended. The Kingpriest was nominally the leader of Good. But in fact he ultimately put his own desires ahead of everyone else's even the gods.
While some people acknowledge a connection between their churches and those of other nations, many do not, or only accept a tenuous connection. The people of Khur are a great example. The minotaurs are another great example, generally denying that their Sargas and the Sargonnas worshipped by humans are the same god. The elven nations likewise have long preferred having their own sub-branches of groups like the Wizards of High Sorcery and the Holy Orders of the Stars rather than be under direct authority of what are often human leaders.
While it is certainly possible to venerate a deity without being a cleric, that does not follow that any class will do for certain roles. Do you propose that White Robe wizards could qualify as Knights of the Sword since they practice a kind of godly magic and often venerate the Gods of Good? Many Whites Robes swore by Paladine, including Par-Salian and Dunbar Mastersmate. And they served Solinari. Isn't that piety adequate if all that matters is general belief rather than service as part of a specific class? Indeed, a WoHS is technically more connected to the gods than a Mystic because he or she is practicing a form of godly magic rather than wild magic.