Shattered Kingdoms

<POST TOO AWESOME TO BE READ, MOVE ALONG>

The problem I see is that you go on the assumption that the primary concern of the Fist is peace. Their tenets are virtue, discipline and enlightenment so although peace could be derived it could also not be. It all depends on leadership at any given time. What you're asking for is a whole new cabal that ditches those tenets in order to be turned into acquiring a more gray substance.

To be honest, however, the only thing that sets Fist apart from Hammer, is "enlightenment", and that's a shaky one considering it's fairly common for warriors to have an idea of finding themselves through combat.

Hammer is a military, and militaries tend to uphold discipline to a T. It's also the Hammer of LIGHT, which covers virtue. one of the main arguments of recent, is that the Fist cabal is redundant.

I really think this is confusing CRS with "their job". Let's get back to definitions.

The Fist cabal is about teaching Enlightment along with Discipline, in some form or another. If done zealously, that's going to create enough reaction to stir up PK from time to time. But PK should not be the Fist's normal mode, much like the Harlequins.

At the same time - they're lighties. If the forces of evil are openly attacking, or if they're working on something like the Adept relic plot, Fist members will fight on the opposite side. Since in general lighties are more popular than darkies, this is good for balance. At least they aren't all in an organization as implacable as the Hammer.

Part of the Adepts' problem, IMO, is working too openly; it's the MC that does open warfare, and it's better set up for it. The other problem is the Hammer-Fist-Druid effective alliance, and I blame that mostly on the Druids.

Druids used to be interested in killing griffons, and that made it painful for lighties to work with them. The change in Nashira's religion to accept griffons broke this down. AFAIK, the Druids never removed this clause from their charter, but it was a rare one who acted on it. The alliance with the lighties was just too good to break for such a questionable cause.

Keep in mind that on the scale of good vs. evil, griffons are supposed to balance necromancers. It wouldn't hurt if like necromancers, griffons had a long list of enemies. If that ends up meaning griffons need a modest buff, that's still a lot more doable than rewriting cabals. (Besides, as a former griffon player, I thought the Nashira-griffon conflict was a lot of fun anyway.)

The griffon-Nashira conflict still lives. They definitely don't accept griffons. I don't think the first thing they'd do is kill a griffon, but they wont welcome one.

A

Nashira's faith accepts griffons?

News to this high priest. Here I've been letting the flock slaughter them with no reason.

Griffons accepted as natural was a stupidity the player of Nashira back then did for a time and was soon withdrawn after it was announced. No, griffons are hated by zealous nashirites. Period.

Nashira came down and proclaimed it back during . . .ohhh . . .damn, back when I was leading the Ayamao Alliance. I used it as an argument when they started a war over Laine being a leader of the Alliance.

I agree that griffons and Nashirites don't get along very well - but that's a long, long way from regular PK. Look at the number of necromancers killed by Druids, as opposed to the the number of griffons killed by them.

The last time that I saw a Druid take griffon-killing seriously was when Koharu was around. But after a few murders, the lighties made it clear that this was going to cost the Druids diplomatically - and Koharu was made to toe the line. It would have been better for the game had the call gone the other way.

In fact during that same time. There was a griffon in Nashira. He was an outcast but was in the faith nonetheless.