Particle_Man said:
There are a few issues that have come up. First, there has been some discussion over what does, and does not, count as deed that costs one nobility. In particular, there is discussion over what one is allowed to do when the other guy starts cheating. There was also a worry over what counts as an unfair advantage. If the White Knight takes mass with the priest, and thus gains the benefits of a bless spell, does that mean the White Knight has an unfair advantage?
Perhaps we really ought to make the interpretation of nobility stricter or perhaps add more nobility penalties. I would suggest nobility penalties where loss of nobility is inevitable or things like:
A) If a lady dies (even a non-permanent death) in proximity all knigts lose nobility (hey that even rhymes!)
This would create situations where loss of nobility was inevitable - a lady engages in combat... and if the knight helps her, he is ganging up on an opponent and loses nobility. If she dies he has failed to protect her and he also loses nobility.
B) If you are ordered to do something ignoble by your patron (Prince Caius for most of the knights, you could change the word patron to superior to include all the knights) you lose nobility if you do not do it (but less than if you do do it), but of course you also loose nobility if you carry out the orders
C) You loose nobility when you 'cheat' even if your opponent 'cheated' first if your cheating is worse than his. Of course, you always loose nobility if you 'cheat' first. We could have ranks of 'cheating' from least ignoble to most ignoble:
Cheating that equalizes your opponent's cheating advantage is least severe and entails no loss of nobility if your opponent cheated first. Apart from that the ranks of cheating could be:
1) Receiving an unfair buff spell that improves combat statistics, Combat from horseback when your opponent is on foot, Using magic to make the non-magic using opponent more susceptible to attacks but not directly disadvantaging him, etc.
2) Ganging up on an opponent, Receiving an unfair buff spell that gives new qualities (invisibility, flight), using ranged weapons against an opponent with melee weapons, using magic to directly attack or disadvantage an opponent who does not use magic, etc.
3) Ambushing an opponent, Using magic to directly take out an opponent (the so called save or die spells), using poison against an opponent, etc.
So if an opponent cheats from the first category and is the first to do so you do not lose nobility if you also cheat within that category, but lose nobility if you begin cheating in the second and third severity category unless he does so first.
Also, the loss of nobility could be per action rather than per battle. Suppose an opponent does not cheat at all and we all gang up on him. Alll of us should probably loose nobility every round we do so, rather than a one off loss per battle.
What do you think?
Second, there is the issue of single combat. If I don't have the other guy cheat, then presumably the knights won't cheat so we will have a one-on-one battle. That being the case, what do the other 8 players do while this battle plays out? Will they get bored? Will they still feel vicariously involved? Things to think about.
Well, this situation has arisen numerous times already. I do not know if I speak for everyone, but I generally feel vicariously involved at least to some degree. In challenges which everybody respects this is not a problem at all since they can be resolved pretty quickly - there being no initiative order and all. In longer fights where some respect the nobility rules and others don't (which makes it necessary to cycle through everyone and prolongs the combat) I suppose it might be better to somehow involve everybody in some way, but this is not always possible and I don't think it is a big problem at all.
It will be interesting to see how it will work out nonetheless. Of course, that assumes that we actually manage to get there. 
