[Discuss] Royal Status

[Kathleen Stalnaker]

On 9/30/06, Paris <parislowenbruck at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2006/2/5, Tom Vogt <tom at lemuria.org>:
> > It's a game mechanic - you step down, you lose royal status. One thing
> > that I might consider changing is setting some term length, i.e. if you
> > step down after having ruled for at least 3 months, then you stay a
> > royal. That would sound reasonable to me.
> >
> > (Reference: [Discuss] Royal Status)
>
>
> and
>
>
> > Wiki: There are two ways to lose royal status: 1) leave the realm (or
> island) 2) step down. Stepping down means you actively decided to give up
> your royal status. It is also necessary to prevent groups of friends from
> exploiting the system and making all their characters royal so you can't ban
> this "clan".
>
> > (Reference:
> http://wiki.battlemaster.org/index.php/Royalty  )
>
>
>
> In Avamar Selective, the former ruler with character name One was forced to
> *step down* from the position of Pontifex due to protests. Is this case any
> difference?
>
> This character is still considered a royal and if it is a bug, you should
> better fix it soon because we have difficulty in kicking him out of the
> Realm and his IC intentions are supposed to destroy the Realm. Since we can
> not ban him, it would be pitty an entire Realm to be destroyed because of a
> bug.
>
> ...knock knock... Tom are you there? :/
>
> (Please, do not start telling again that there are other ways to get rid of
> him. Yes, there may be, but this is not the point here. If he should not be
> royal and he wasn't, this thread would have not been started. Thank you.)
>
> --
> Lucifer Jr. - Kalmar Islands
> Esperos - Avamar Selective
> Laura - Nighthelm
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribing and other list options:
> http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>

That was a rather disrepectful way to address this issue Paris.