Candidate Statement: Tertius Options

[ChrisAndrews]

Good evening,

My name is Tertius and I've been a Knight since I learnt of the Order's existence - almost a decade now. Joining the Knights has been the most impactful decision of my life and I am humbled to have been nominated for this office.

In joining the Knights I have gone on to swear myself to the Virtues of Imrazil. The Virtue I have sworn oaths to, and try my best to exemplify, is the Virtue of Unity.

I have some advantage over my fellows in having read their statements before composing my own - I think we are very much aligned and I will not insult them by trying to reword the same without acknowledging them.

I wholeheartedly agree with Angevine's vision for the Knights beyond the Mercenary trail. Equally I agree with Kail that more competition from other organisations will allow us to gain members who want to join because of the Oath not because of the gym.

The Lord Knight cannot achieve these things alone and motivated Lords of Orders are needed. Equally we should not muster just when a world needs saving but to make the lives of the common folk better as well.

I will welcome further questions.

Tertius

[Patch]

I have a small number of questions, that I will put to all candidates.

Firstly, The Knights have fallen out of favour with many mercenaries... why do you feel this has happened? and how would you go about changing that?

Secondly, The democratic nature of the Knights is a powerful symbol of inclusion for it's members, but there are clearly drawbacks I would be interested to hear your feelings about this election cycle, it's positive aspects and negative aspects.

Thirdly, please give me an example of your behaviour in a recent mission, that you consider exemplifies your values and acts as an example of why you would be a good Lord Knight.

Lastly, please give me an example of behaviour you have seen amongst your fellow mercenaries, the example need not be of another knight, that you felt was deeply unknightly. How did you challenge that behaviour?

Thank you for your time

Da'Karte

[Sharperoc]

I'll be asking the same question to all candidates, so my apologies to those who have already read this. It's philosophical in nature, so again apologies but I hope it might spark some conversation that would allow me a greater insight into the candidates.

I've often thought about our order and the presence of dark hearted brothers and sisters within it and that itself has always struck me as a curious thing. This is in no way a slight against those brothers and sisters, as I've always found myself well supported regardless of the colour of their hearts. I might add, this does not apply to those that by their very nature are marked - I think that goes beyond the scope of a reasonable question.

I guess the point I'm getting at, is, those brothers and sisters whose hearts are dark yet capable of change - why has that change often not occured. To me, it would follow logically that by following our oaths, that the Knight who puts the lives of the innocent and the undefended above their own could not possibly find their soul unblackened as a result. I will be the first to admit, I tend to finalise matters with those who I find have butchered innocents - I'm not a second chances, five minute chat sort of Knight, if you were able to make a concious choice and that's the choice you made, the best thing I can do is put you in the ground. Even still, I find no blackness within my heart or mind.

What are your particular thoughts on this?


Ritz
Knight Warmage

[ChrisAndrews]

Firstly, The Knights have fallen out of favour with many mercenaries... why do you feel this has happened? and how would you go about changing that?

25 years ago there were a handful of organisations like ours. For most it was a choice of the Knights or the Companions. Now there are many choices available and most do not hold their members to an oath as we do.
Equally there we have been less active than ten or fifteen years ago. I think being a visible and organised group does a lot to help.

I don't really consider either of these to be a bad thing either. People should not join the Knights because there is no other option.

Secondly, The democratic nature of the Knights is a powerful symbol of inclusion for it's members, but there are clearly drawbacks I would be interested to hear your feelings about this election cycle, it's positive aspects and negative aspects.

I think the vote is a good tradition and should be kept. It is something that sets us apart from other organisations and should be kept.

The one thing I would probably change is to move the time of the election to the Summer or Autumn months. This would probably be a change I would seek to enact by the end of the first year which would put my own term at about 18 months. I would not be seeking to move back to a yearly cycle - That choice has been made and it should be at least given a chance of success and with that knowledge a candidate can commit to that change.

Thirdly, please give me an example of your behaviour in a recent mission, that you consider exemplifies your values and acts as an example of why you would be a good Lord Knight.

I honestly find this a hard question to answer.

I don't think any of my actions are particularly noteworthy in the last few times I have travelled. Being a Knight is being dependable, stalwart and someone your companions can look to and trust.

A year or so ago I travelled with the Church of Talthar to the world where Talthar originally came from. There was a point we triggered some trap and transportational powers were laid upon us. Many weaker members of our group were caught by this. Knowing that Thor, Tai and other such luminaries remained I chose to let the power take me as well so that I could support those that were taken.

Lastly, please give me an example of behaviour you have seen amongst your fellow mercenaries, the example need not be of another knight, that you felt was deeply unknightly. How did you challenge that behaviour?

If someone hasn't sworn the Oaths I won't hold them to my standards but I will challenge them if allowing their behaviours would come against my Oaths.

There was a situation where a ritual strike was due to hit the Empire. The Knights were gathered as part of a larger muster and we sought to deflect part of this strike. A specific ritual orb was required. The merchant who had it was not aware of the threat and started to haggle. The discussion in the group turned to stealing or killing him for the orb - the greater good and all that. I challenged that behaviour and spoke with the man who gladly gave over the orb once understanding the situation. We were as successful as we could be with the ritual strike impacting out at sea.

Equally there was a time where we gathered in Thimon and Ratfolk who hate our order were there. They quickly got under the skin of one who travelled with us and it almost came to blows. I and another Knight called this out - just because we are not popular with a people does not mean we have no duty to them. We eventually managed to calm the situation but there was a moment where I was ready to fight a fellow Knight over that even if that resulted in being cast out. The Knights Oaths are more than membership of the Knights as an organisation.


And for Ritz:

What are your particular thoughts on this?

Tricky, but certainly interesting. I also have wondered similar questions. In an attempt to keep it vaguely succinct:

Whilst our end-goals are "Good" there are often several ways to achieve them. Some of those methods are well and fully outside our oath - Sacrificing a village to save a town for example. However killing an enemy and raising them as a Ghoul is within Oaths. It's not a tactic I would encourage but it achieves the same ends and often more effectively.

From there it is a simple sliding scale. The fact that several faiths of light are in direct philisophical opposition shows that none of them are the definitive faith that is "good". What constitutes "Evil" for the Sacred Heart is very different from what St Michael would consider. It must therefore be possible for a "morally corrupt" person to still be a competent and rational agent for "good". Imrazil is famously "morally corrupt" when it comes to bloodshed nearby but is undoubtedly an entity of "Good".

Understanding this, and understanding your own limitations, is part of the Virtue of Humility.


Tertius

[Whybover]

So my questions to start for the nominees:
Q1. Will you commit to a 1 life term, and instruct your voice/unity/lords that if you are to fall for a final time a new lord knight should be elected.
It has occurred more than once in the past decade the Lord Knight has been reborn (3 times I believe if not more) and each time they have held onto power through death.
I do not believe this is correct, a vote is for that Knight in that form and body not their soul or similar.
Q2: Will you commit to a regular review of the activeness of your nominated Lords of Order and state you are more than prepared to refresh your Lords and promote/appoint new ones during your term.
We are all aware there are many times Lords of Orders are not seen at all during their appointment and it is a poor showing in leadership in my opinion that this never has consequences.
Q3: Do you understand and agree that the order was formed in Legend, that the Oath is to defend all worlds not just Primus and that all worlds should be treated with the same garvity and import and not “sacrificed” for the good of Primus.

Transcribed by myself, Tydarch, on behalf of Amorphus.

[ChrisAndrews]

Q1. Will you commit to a 1 life term, and instruct your voice/unity/lords that if you are to fall for a final time a new lord knight should be elected.
It has occurred more than once in the past decade the Lord Knight has been reborn (3 times I believe if not more) and each time they have held onto power through death.
I do not believe this is correct, a vote is for that Knight in that form and body not their soul or similar.

I'd be happy to commit as such for myself.

It seems reasonable to at the very minimum have a formal-reconfirmation of the returned Lord Knight by the Lords of Orders. If they do not so-confirm then it would fall to the Voice to call the vote.

Q2: Will you commit to a regular review of the activeness of your nominated Lords of Order and state you are more than prepared to refresh your Lords and promote/appoint new ones during your term.
We are all aware there are many times Lords of Orders are not seen at all during their appointment and it is a poor showing in leadership in my opinion that this never has consequences.

As this is due to be a 2 year term I would commit to reviewing the Lords of Order at the half way mark. I don't think this would be a public review but would at least be a public re-affirmation.
Obviously that does not rule out changes beyond this window if they are warranted.

Q3: Do you understand and agree that the order was formed in Legend, that the Oath is to defend all worlds not just Primus and that all worlds should be treated with the same garvity and import and not “sacrificed” for the good of Primus.

I am not a native of Primus I just live here.

The Knights are not a Imperial organisation nor are they a Primal one. The Oath does not place one group, plane or goverment above the others. There may be situations where hard choices must be made with no good solutions but we should not out of hand dismiss others for not being from Primus or the Empire.


Tertius

[Dave]

Soooo

Simple and short.

1)The orders, there are always extra classes for Battle and Watch seem fairly busy..The others are emprty, any ideas to change to lessons? Had a quick look and the lessons are boring

2)Knightly Artefacts, The order of easiness, seem to have lots of little ones more suited to newer people, not since the Land of Legend times have the Knights had lots of powerful arteacfts.

Do you see one big, lots of little ones to be better?

Or just none associated to guild...

3) FUN QUESTION...Whats your favourite spell?

Snow

[ChrisAndrews]

1)The orders, there are always extra classes for Battle and Watch seem fairly busy..The others are emprty, any ideas to change to lessons? Had a quick look and the lessons are boring

I've no idea if it's possible but I'd support it. I think it would be one of the factors that went into appointing the appropriate Lord of Order as I feel they would need to be invested in getting it done.

2)Knightly Artefacts, The order of easiness, seem to have lots of little ones more suited to newer people, not since the Land of Legend times have the Knights had lots of powerful arteacfts.

Do you see one big, lots of little ones to be better?

Or just none associated to guild...

I think "powerful" artifacts aren't needed. Rather I'd go for many smaller "impactful" ones. They're easier to find and maintain but can be life-or-death especially for our newer members.

Things like the Lord Knight's Blade, Resolution and the Armour of the Land are probably more suited to being taken up by an individual and empowered that way.

3) FUN QUESTION...Whats your favourite spell?

I love a cantrip so I'll go with Flash - it's done me well with defeating the Shadowstrike spell!
My most-cast spell is probably Fury or Bedazzle.


Tertius