Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5364224" data-attributes="member: 87792">Are you talking about levels or social rank?&nbsp; Because this means that advancement stops short.&nbsp;&nbsp;Nonsense!&nbsp;&nbsp;And here you have a model of a species that is going to fail and fail hard when it comes up against a cooperative one.&nbsp; Ambitious druids are brought down slightly after their prime by younger and more ambitious druids, never having the chance to pass on their knowledge.&nbsp; All powerful druids see all other powerful druids as threats unless they are the same rank.&nbsp; So they won't help each other.&nbsp; Instead they are going to be looking to stick the knife into higher ranking druids, so they've already half won by the time of the duel.&nbsp;Arcanists on the other hand get stronger over time because they share knowledge - druids are capped in terms of total power.&nbsp; What this also means is that even if one druid can beat one arcanist, ten arcanists are going to kick the arse of ten druids - and in a hundred verses hundred contest, the arcanists wait and pick up the pieces when the druids have stopped fighting each other.&nbsp;It gets worse.&nbsp; If the only way to become a powerful druid is to defeat a powerful druid and steal their strength, the order of druids must by its very nature get weaker over time as some of those powerful druids are killed by people who aren't druids.&nbsp; Also the skills of a politician and those of a fighter and those of a caster are different.&nbsp; There are times when a king who really can't fight is simply the best man for the job.&nbsp;This isn't Nature: Red in tooth and claw.&nbsp; It's Nature: Red from self-inflicted wounds and terrible medicine.&nbsp;&nbsp;Oh, it has.&nbsp; But good vanilla icecream made with real vanilla is very nice.&nbsp; Hummous, chocolate, and chilli ice cream is not something I want to see return.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5364224, member: 87792"] Are you talking about levels or social rank? Because this means that advancement stops short. Nonsense! And here you have a model of a species that is going to fail and fail hard when it comes up against a cooperative one. Ambitious druids are brought down slightly after their prime by younger and more ambitious druids, never having the chance to pass on their knowledge. All powerful druids see all other powerful druids as threats unless they are the same rank. So they won't help each other. Instead they are going to be looking to stick the knife into higher ranking druids, so they've already half won by the time of the duel. Arcanists on the other hand get stronger over time because they share knowledge - druids are capped in terms of total power. What this also means is that even if one druid can beat one arcanist, ten arcanists are going to kick the arse of ten druids - and in a hundred verses hundred contest, the arcanists wait and pick up the pieces when the druids have stopped fighting each other. It gets worse. If the only way to become a powerful druid is to defeat a powerful druid and steal their strength, the order of druids must by its very nature get weaker over time as some of those powerful druids are killed by people who aren't druids. Also the skills of a politician and those of a fighter and those of a caster are different. There are times when a king who really can't fight is simply the best man for the job. This isn't Nature: Red in tooth and claw. It's Nature: Red from self-inflicted wounds and terrible medicine. Oh, it has. But good vanilla icecream made with real vanilla is very nice. Hummous, chocolate, and chilli ice cream is not something I want to see return. [/QUOTE]

Verification