Chivalric Knights
-
Ok, before I get into the topic, what I mean by it, and my ideas, first let me say that right now I'm just putting feelers out to see how many people would actually be interested in seeing this in-game. As I've told some of you, right now I'm in the middle of a whole lot of obnoxious jumping through hoops trying to move from the U.S. to Canada, so it's likely that I won't have time to get very involved in anything at all until version 5. In the past two and a half months, I think I've been able to squeeze in about 20 hours total of play time. Right now, though, I'm curious to know what other players and the DMs think about the idea of an order of Knights that are more closely based on Chivalric ideals than what we've ever had before.
So, what do I mean by "Chivalric Knights"? Well, as far as I understand, from what I've read since childhood, there are four kinds of Knights:
-
Real-world middle ages knights who were basically elite soldiers. Some honourable, some just thugs, but all really just land-owning soldiers who used the most advanced battlefield technology of the time and owed their allegiance to their King. Honour and what-not were for the most part really left up to their own discretion most of the time, especially in their dealings with their own serfs. Among themselves they talked the talk when it came to honour and justice and all that, but the sad historical evidence I've read suggests that most of them didn't walk the walk when it came to their dealings with those less wealthy than themselves. Or women.
-
Real-world modern knights for whom intellectual pursuits are much more important than battlefield exploits. During World War 2 and in the first five years after it, more people were knighted in Great Britain for contributions to the Arts, Science, and Medicine than for any dashing war-time heroics. Despite that being the bloodiest war the world had seen before or since. And of course today almost no one is ever knighted for fighting or flying fighter jets or whatever, but we've got Sir Elton John and Sir Sean Connery, et cetera.
-
Fantasy world Chivalric Knights based upon the ideals of King Arthur's Court, wherein Courtly Love, Justice, Beauty, Art, and God were all seen as sortof inter-connected, to form a composite philosophy that everything that is Beautiful is Good, everything that is Good is Beautiful, everything that is Good or Beautiful is Just, and it's all thanks to God and worth fighting for. That it is, in fact, an honour and a priviledge to fight for Justice, or to avenge an insult to a Lady, and that the most important thing in life is to love without ever, ever consumating that love. To love from afar was both noble and romantic, and that to dedicate one's life to the glory of the object of one's love is as important as dedicating one's life to truth and justice.
-
And lastly, the dark side; Knights as a disciplined, ordered instrument of fear and oppression. Hiter's SS comes to mind. The Blackgaurds, the faceless, helmed terrors that march with perfectly synchronized jack-boots over anything that gets in their way.
Now, what I'm most interested in when it comes to a fantasy RPG are the last two. The Legion does an OK job of that last one, (though I think they could be a bit scarier and a bit less eager to please everyone), but the Red Harts aren't really Chivalric Knights. Don't get me wrong, I like them, in fact I think they're great, but they're not really concerned with the ideals of Love and Art at all. Not even a teensy bit. They're really soldiers. Honourable soldiers who believe in Justice and Truth and all that, and very admirable, but still far, far more concerned with military affairs than what I think of when I think of "knight". The joining requirements prove that. Very military focused.
Personally, when I think the word "Knight" in term of a fantasy setting, I think of Gawain and Lancelot. When I think "Knight", I think of someone who could cut you in half with their greatsword if need be, then feel very sorry that it was necessary, then go home and have an intelligent discussion with the other Knights about the latest book they read, or concert or play they saw. A warrior not just of light, but of thought and beauty. Knights who don't only fight for a more Just world, but a more Beautiful and Educated one as well. I'd like to see that in Arabel. Perhaps something involving Sune, Oghma, and Denier, possibly Torm or Tyr as well as the main deities. In Arabel, I'd like to see an order of knights wherein a great poet or writer or philosopher has as much chance of entry as a skilled warrior, and someone who is both is ideal.** Would anyone else like to see that? Intellectual knights who value Philosophy, Love and Beauty as much as they do Truth and Justice? Warriors skilled with both words and swords?
I have written up a pretty detailed sketch of what I have in mind, but I've rambled on too long already so I'll spare you the details. For now. Right now I'm interested in everyone's opinion of the general concept. Your thoughts are appreciated.
** P.S. Not talking about a bard's club. What I have in mind, all good-aligned classes would be welcome. The Perform skill covers performing art in front of an audience, not creating it. Any character can be an artist/philosopher/whatever. Someone can be the best poet in the world and be terrible at reading their poetry to an audience, and, conversely, not every great singer can write a decent song.
-
-
I am pro-jackboots against their throats knight.
More Oppression, more dystopian fantasy!
-
We have that. It's called the Red Hart. You just have to dig into it a little more - and possible look to expand that part of their order from an IG/IC PoV
-
We have two of those as far as I know.
-
Organized_Chaos, No. Just no. The Red Harts are NOT Chivalric Knights. They are purely military. They care nothing for art, philosophy, beauty, love, any of the chivalric ideals except for truth and justice. They don't allow anyone who isn't a warrior of some kind in.
-
Knights are men trained for war, elite warriors. But you can easily be a chivalric knight (as you understand this term) in a military order. Lead by example and make others more chivalric.
I don't think i remember a fantasy or historical knightly order refusing admission due to applicant's lack of ability to rhyme or paint. But it surely can be an asset and you can cultivate it within the ranks.
Sunite order can be a viable idea though, if you come up with engaging goals for them other than being all handsome and artsy. -
Direfish,
Yes, I think it would be possible to make the Red Harts more chivalric without affecting their current goals if they'd let archers and mages in, because I don't like the idea of a faction who has severe restricitons on who can join while their chief enemy lets just anyone in, but that's a different complaint. (And the ability to rhyme or paint would not be a requirement to join, you'd only have to possess an appreciation for art and philosophy, not ability in it. However, if you were a great artist or thinker and couldn't hold a sword, you could get in on the basis of your contributions to the arts and quality of life.)
Anyway, I know what can be done, I just want to know if anyone else thinks that knights who are intellectuals as well as warriors would be a good idea. Personally, I do NOT think that adding another faction to the current version of Arabel is a good idea. We already have more factions that the number of players can support. I'm thinking of either a project for version 5, or a change to the Harts, or both. I'd like to know what other people think about knights who care about more than fighting (but can still kick ass when they need to).
-
Knightly Orders in this setting would mainly hold to the ideals of their patron God or Goddessess. The Red Hart's three main deities primarily seem to revolve around many of the ideals Knights are commonly assosiated with such as chivalry, royalty, nobelese oblige (pretty funny, seeing as they supported a rebellion against the Obarskyrs but hey) and all that fluffy stuff. Now what you are describing sounds like a Knightly Order of Sune and thats fine, however, I think there is nothing stopping you from creating 'warrior-poet' for the Red Hart to fufill what you're talking about here. There is nothing stopping you from discussing philosophy with Sir Pennyworth and his cronies, there is nothing stopping you from having your character paint or be creative, and there is nothing stopping you from playing a scholarly knight who might very well be apprenticed to one of the Red Hart NPCs who do follow these ideals, exploring the notions you want your character to explore and share with other PCs.
I love the idea, personally, and I have several concepts in my unused junkbox which are very similar to what you've described but also quite different. An Azuthan Order, a Savras Order, and a 'faithless' Order. Not all particularly Knightly but can easily fit into that mold of 'scholarly-warriors' although it would seem the Azuthan one employed 'assassins' (a la assassins creed -_-) but hey, half the time I'm high when I write.
Anyway, I personally think you should run with the Harts on this one. Maureen would just love a handsome young Sunite being obsessed with Deidre!
-
Right now RL is keeping me from being in-game very much at all, I'm thinking of a project for version 5. I have long considered doing exactly as you suggest, Broken Gunblade, but I do have one major objection to the Red Harts that has prevented me: their rigorous exclusion of non-melee types. I realize that the knightly ideal of honour in battle is standing toe-to-toe with the enemy, sword in hand, however, I feel that honour can be found in more places than the battle field and this stubborn exclusion of good-aligned members who aren't built to wear plate in the face of an enemy, the Legion, who takes full advantage of archers and mages is nothing short of suicidal. This is why Gina has always been willing to help the Harts, but never willing to join. My chaotic-good little warrior is extremely turned off by blind adherence to an unrealistic and self-destructive policy. Last time I checked, the Hart's policy was that "anyone is welcome to come help us, but not join", so, that's like saying "feel free to come die for us but don't expect any supplies or equipment or real, tangible expressions of gratitude". If the military forces of today had that sort of "only infantry gets equipment" policy, they'd have no technicians, artillerists, or anything else but foot soldiers.
If the Harts would admit non-melee characters and give them all the benefits and priviledges of their melee members, then Gina would join immediately because they would then meet her standards of practicality. However, RL would still be keeping me from being much involved for the next couple months at least; so I'm still thinking of a project for version 5.
-
While I get what the OP is saying, you have to think that in a fantasy setting with probably hundreds of different Knightly Orders, not all of them are going to fit in with your vision of a chivalric order. The DMs have developed the Red Hart faction into a Knightly Military Order, which probably fits better on a server oriented towards adventure and action. Like others said, if your concept is good you can pretty much sneak in any character into any faction if you're smart about it.
-
What you describe is pretty much the idea behind the Order of the Ruby Rose, the Sunite knightly order, which obviously I agree with the idea behind, since I essentially played one for a year and a half, and rose to be quite an important part of the server's political landscape at the time. I based a lot of my ideas for Sian on Baldassare Castiglione's "Book of the Courtier", which is a fine work which touches on a lot of the things you mentioned above.
-
What is chivalry? A few top listed definitions gleaned from a quick google search:
"chiv·al·ry? ?[shiv-uhl-ree] Show IPA
noun, plural chiv·al·ries for 6.
1.
the sum of the ideal qualifications of a knight, including courtesy, generosity, valor, and dexterity in arms.
2.
the rules and customs of medieval knighthood.
3.
the medieval system or institution of knighthood.
4.
a group of knights.
5.
gallant warriors or gentlemen: fair ladies and noble chivalry."chiv·al·ry/?SHiv?lr?/
Noun:
The medieval knightly system with its religious, moral, and social code.
Knights, noblemen, and horsemen collectively."The Code of Chivalry that the Red Harts follow falls in line with these definitions. Their version of the chivalric code contains moral, religious, and combat based edicts. There are customs and ideals valued by the order, beyond the code as well. Of course, it doesn't embody every single aspect, but it is certainly a chivalric knight order.
Players and NPC's alike have added and altered interpretations of the Red Hart Code in the past. I have also seen players portray knights that put the 'romantic' aspects first and foremost, and other players bring their own religious ideas to the faction. A good source of interfaction conflict, in my opinion!
Also, bowmen and mages are employed by the Red Hart. You just won't see Red Hart knights using bows themselves(outside of hunting), for reasons I suppose would be better suited as an in-game conversation. Fewer knights rely on arcane studies, but they do exist in the faction.
All these things aside, it is still a military order of knights, expected to follow certain rules with discipline. There is a certain uniform everyone is expected to be able to wear, that is full plate mail. Given a lot of middle ages knight orders had their knights wearing chainmail, I could see an argument for that, to be taken up with DM's. The Squires wear chainmail.
Even though there is a grey area in the RH that a character like Gina could step in and make an impact, you seem unwilling to do so simply because things aren't already exactly how you want them. I also see this conversation as a bit silly since you have stated yourself you won't be playing until sometime in v5 anyways, when the RH are likely gone! Go work on making a player faction that embodies what you want and run with it!
-
What is chivalry?
All the things you mention are indeed Chivalry as it was seen in the real world, however there is one aspect from the Arthurian legends that is left out: the ideals of Courtly Love. Knights adhering to this ideal would choose a woman that they can never, ever have and devote themselves to her. Writing poems and music in her honour, dedicating their victories on the battlefield and jousting tournament to her glory. All without ever even touching this woman (usually she was married to someone else and a noble; the queen, the wife of a noble, et cetera). These romantic touches spawned art and philosophy in the knights of legend, and it's this that I'd like to see more of. Warriors who are also intellectuals and artists.
Even though there is a grey area in the RH that a character like Gina could step in and make an impact, you seem unwilling to do so simply because things aren't already exactly how you want them.
Actually, the reason why Gina has not joined the Harts is an IC one: Chaotic Good little Gina has a very real problem with what she sees as hypocrisy, injustice, and stupidity in the Harts: their policy that "archers and mages can come die for us, but we won't let them join, won't give them gear and training, won't treat them as equals." She REALLY hates that. In-game, she tried for MONTHS to get Raventree and others to change their minds about this policy, and was met with stubborn refusal over and over and over again, eventually getting rather rude responses from Sir James. I can only try for so long before I give up.
I also see this conversation as a bit silly since you have stated yourself you won't be playing until sometime in v5 anyways, when the RH are likely gone! Go work on making a player faction that embodies what you want and run with it!
I learned many, many years ago that trying to create a faction that nobody else is very excited about is hard work that ends in futility, so the point is to see how many others like the idea of knights based on romantic ideals so that I'll know if it's worth even trying. I don't need hard work and futility in a game, I have real life for that. If one or two other people like the idea so much that they want to help get it going in version 5, great. If not, I'll just do what I've been doing: playing my character as a chivalric knight in every way but title.
If one or two others are really interested, I'd like to start conversation now about the precise rules and requirements of the faction, get as much as possible sorted before version 5 even happens.
-
Can't wait to see the poems written by Raventree!
-
however there is one aspect from the Arthurian legends that is left out: the ideals of Courtly Love.
Mate, but they were not all like that. Many knights from Arthurian legends actually successfully procreated or didn't care about courtly love at all. So it's more of a personal choice than order's policy.
-
@Green:
Red Harts aren't really Chivalric Knights.
Well, let's look at an actual, classical representation of a Chivalric Knight? The Knight's Code of Chivalry described in the Song of Roland would fit our purposes. Their oaths are:
To fear God and maintain His Church (the RH do this, if only for their own gods)
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith (Clearly, with their Siamorphe relation)
To protect the weak and defenceless (IIRC, they do that, too)
To give succour to widows and orphans (well, they -could-, but it probably wouldn't make for grand high adventure)
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence (granted, some errors have been made in the past, but it's the general rule)
To live by honour and for glory (I'm pretty sure 'glory' has fallen away, and 'honour' is regarded far more from the perspective of our current guilt culture than their shame-and-honour culture, but it's there.)
To despise pecuniary reward (Not really, but for practical reasons: classical Knights were nobles who had estates that would pay them, anyway. Our Knights need consumables to stay actual)
To fight for the welfare of all (Aiyup. Martial aspects and all that.)
To obey those placed in authority (Again, Siamorphe.)
To guard the honour of fellow knights (They tend to do that.)
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit (And that's all the LG-ess).
To keep faith (That's all in their religious aspects)
At all times to speak the truth (I'm not sure if they're -forced- to, but it's a general part of policy.)
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun (Huh. That's actually an interesting one!)
To respect the honour of women (In modern days, sticking close to -their- interpretation of this would look like anti-feminism, male chauvisism, and other non-popular concepts.)
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal (They don't even refuse challenges from -lessers-, like the Legion!)
Never to turn the back upon a foe (Well, it's sort of represented in the melee focus, but… okay, they don't have a lot of that. It's not really doable in the current combat system.)It does bear mentioning, however, that classical chivalric standards apparently include nothing about going toe-to-toe. If you're looking them in the face while doing it, you may as well be shooting them with a rifle.
-
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit (And that's all the LG-ess).
The RH actually falls short in this regard. Their attitude towards good aligned archers and mages is quite unfair. If someone is going to come to your aid, and risk death to help you, you should be willing to treat them as an equal and welcome them into your ranks. Period.
-
I loled when I read the factoid about equal treatment for everyone.
The Red Hart's follow Nobanion, Lathander, and Siamorphe, all these deities do not believe in equality.
Nope.
They are patrons of nobles, who by the definition of Siamorphe, were BORN (inherently superior) to lead those who are not nobility (everyone else).
Lathander has an egotistic complex and tried to reshape the multiverse in his image (awesome dude btw, I love this sort of NG NPC)
Nobanion is a deity of royalty, how more supremest can you get?
Wizards, Archers, these generally fall into a support roll and CANNOT FULFILL THE KNIGHTLY OATHS without a -serious- change of direction.
You live in a KINGDOM, not a DEMOCRACY, some people are BETTER than others by the right of TITLE.
You live in a MAGIC FANTASY WORLD, Where a HALF-ORC is considered little better than an ORC and can be KILLED for speaking ORC or worshiping ORCAN gods.
TIEFLINGS are strangled on birth often times.
AASIMARS likewise, and often treated as second-class citizens and widely regarded as inhuman.
Cormyr's laws are -just- in that they do not -suppress-, but they are hardly -fair- in that they allow equal opportunity.
What is the point of a Knightly Order if anyone can join, and not only men of righteous heart and steel-clad vestments?
Your CG squire was looking at it from a chaotic perspective, not a lawful one, you, as a player, are perceiving the faction from a 21st century perspective, not a 13th century one where peasants were regularly dragged to the castle and abused, used, and then tossed out the garbage bin.
:?
Lawful good is NOT lawful fair. <.<
-
That's not true for the City of Arabel. Attitudes towards Tieflings range from indifference to slight distrust.
Bring back the EO, sign my petition.DARKWOOD DARKWOOD DARKWOOD
-
Arthurian Knights? Honourable?
Wasn't Lancelot shaking up with his best mate's wife? How is that Honourable?
My image of knights are much more warrior based, and much more savvie and even devious. The Knights Templar are my favorites.