Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Judge Dredd]

It sounds like the general consensus on how this rule is perceived is very close. The differences are extremely small. Here is what we seem to agree on.

If you get shot with an arrow, take what you felt immediately. There are scant few archers who will argue with, or correct you, unless the arrow was deflected and they are telling you NOT to take it. 

If an archer is telling you that you have been shot, there is a good chance that either you did not feel it, or the arrow was deflected by a weapon and would have hit you. So you should just take what they say without question.

If you are unsure of where/if you have been shot, look for the archer and give them your best confused Labrador look, they will be happy to help you.

If an arrow hits you in the arm, and the archer calls you dead, you have two options:
1) Take the arm and continue fighting. (the archer may want to talk to you after)
2) Take death (then after, go talk to the archer)
Neither of these reactions should cause you or the archer to get into a yelling match while the rest of us are trying to fight, neither one of you are that important.

In all cases, if you are an archer, keep your damn mouth shut until you need to "clarify" something.

[Whisper Moonson]

Blackhawk is wise.

The end of the world will now commence. 

[Janwin]

So... a question brought up by Reggie's comment. I will re-read through the rules to check, but there used to be a thing about garb counting as a hit, thus if an arrow hits your skirt it CAN count as a hit. Gray covered it in the archery classes some time back and the idea that he tried to plant was something like "If I can clearly see where your legs are and I clearly shot between them I SHOULDN'T call that a hit, but If it isn't clear where your legs are and I hit you in the skirt it could have hit you in the leg and I COULD call that shot."

Kyrax, do you recall being at any of those Rag archery classes where Gray said this? I'm trying to think of anyone else that was there, and there were probably a bunch of you who were, I just didn't know who you all were then.

Actually, quite true, Silk.  I'm not sure it was Gray, but honestly, it probably was.  My first few Ragnaroks (17, 18, 19) it was explained EXACTLY like that.  If you want to wear a skirt, it's your choice, except you are expected to take hits to garb as hits to yourself.  I seem to recall when I first started in Dag that ‘garb’ counted as a hit.  No amount of garments could save you from death, and it was played that way to save confusion since you can’t always tell if you hit your opponent or not through baggy garments, and it was viewed to be the best way of handling it to just have any hits to garb count as hits to the player.

Then came the hippy skirts on men.  Oh…the hippy skirts.  How they did get popular, and how the methods of play came to be based around people wearing hippy skirts having the ‘rules’ (I say ‘rules’ because it’s more of ‘interpretations of the rules’ be in their favor).  Garb started being played as not a hit (with people giving you an angry look if you called anything when it hit their skirt).

As to the archers having the final say: that is also EXACTLY how it was explained to me when I first started.  That is how it was taught at my first Ragnarok.  And that is how I’ve played it ever since.  MOST archers will not use it, but they DO have the power to call their shot and you DO have to take it.  The fact that most archers will not call a shot unless they absolutely have to seems to have given the impression to people that archers do not have the ability to call their shots and have it be the final word.  Wrong.  It’s not the archer saying “I don’t have the right to call my shot.”  It’s the archer saying “they took the shot, or something close enough, so there’s no point to calling the shot.”  Or “I trust the fighter on the other team enough to accept what he/she took.”

I’m not sure exactly how much of the Dagorhir community got the idea that archers don’t have the final say (could be a number of things ranging from the above to new fighters seeing other fighters argue with or not take shots called by archers (“hey, if he didn’t take it, I don’t have to either!”) to improperly taught archers passing on what they were taught on the subject).
It could also simply be that, in practice, archers don’t often call their shots because most targets tend to feel the hit (note that I say “most”, not “all”, hence why archers ARE allowed to call shots) and take what they feel.

These experiences have made me think most archers are sketchy. I have met a few who were honest.

I've seen fighters just ignore archer calls, or ignore arrows.  I've also seen people blow off legit melee hits.  These experiences have made me think most fighters are sketchy.  I have met a few who were honest.

See the failure in your logic?  Yes, there are idiots on the field.  There always will be.  To assume that most people of a certain group are cheaters...maybe you should rethink your hobby, since you seem to not be enjoying playing with all us cheaters.

[Squire Ducky McFeelgood]

So Archers are allowed to clarify a hit, but shouldn't if the fighter has already taken a hit from it. Thou they could, and if they do, their call trumps that of what a fighter takes. So if they make a call, even if they are wrong, you have to take what THEY say.

Its a big change from the way i was taught, so im trying to make sure i grab all the parts and levels so i can explain it.

[Janwin]

That's how it was taught to me about a decade ago, and how I've played it since, Ducky.

Yes, people do make wrong calls.  It's unfortunate when it happens, but that's what heralds are for.  If someone calls poorly, alert a herald so they can smack the archer around.

I strongly believe that it should remain that way due to reasons like the previously cited "Dominus--arrow!" moments.  Those actually happen quite a lot on the field.

[Inextirpable Kyrax]

So... a question brought up by Reggie's comment. I will re-read through the rules to check, but there used to be a thing about garb counting as a hit, thus if an arrow hits your skirt it CAN count as a hit. Gray covered it in the archery classes some time back and the idea that he tried to plant was something like "If I can clearly see where your legs are and I clearly shot between them I SHOULDN'T call that a hit, but If it isn't clear where your legs are and I hit you in the skirt it could have hit you in the leg and I COULD call that shot."

Kyrax, do you recall being at any of those Rag archery classes where Gray said this? I'm trying to think of anyone else that was there, and there were probably a bunch of you who were, I just didn't know who you all were then.

Actually, quite true, Silk.  I'm not sure it was Gray, but honestly, it probably was.  My first few Ragnaroks (17, 18, 19) it was explained EXACTLY like that.  If you want to wear a skirt, it's your choice, except you are expected to take hits to garb as hits to yourself.  I seem to recall when I first started in Dag that ‘garb’ counted as a hit.  No amount of garments could save you from death, and it was played that way to save confusion since you can’t always tell if you hit your opponent or not through baggy garments, and it was viewed to be the best way of handling it to just have any hits to garb count as hits to the player.
…It could also simply be that, in practice, archers don’t often call their shots because most targets tend to feel the hit (note that I say “most”, not “all”, hence why archers ARE allowed to call shots) and take what they feel.

Can’t say I recall that specifically, but it does sound both like something Gray would say about “garb” hits and the way I’ve learned to play it.  Garb is like that weapon in the way of an arrow shot, it doesn’t block the arrow, so whatever is behind that shot or swing is hit.  Sure if you’ve got baggy trousers, a skirt or a cloak, there’s a risk that you’re going to get called on something that may not have been valid.  When I started fighting I wore a cape – it was a choice knowing that it could cause me problems. 

And a double thumbs up on the last point you made – I don’t call most shots because the target has taken the hit I thought landed.  And when they took something else, its time to nock that next arrow and hit ‘em again.  Most of my calls tend to be like that one with Halbrust the other weekend – where he just didn’t feel the shot in the midst of a melee, or they looked to me to clarify what was hit. 

These experiences have made me think most archers are sketchy. I have met a few who were honest.

I've seen fighters just ignore archer calls, or ignore arrows.  I've also seen people blow off legit melee hits.  These experiences have made me think most fighters are sketchy.  I have met a few who were honest.

See the failure in your logic?  Yes, there are idiots on the field.  There always will be.  To assume that most people of a certain group are cheaters...maybe you should rethink your hobby, since you seem to not be enjoying playing with all us cheaters.

Very well put Janwin – and Tyrieal, welcome to the world of human beings.  Some play fair, others cheat, and many, many of us sometimes make mistakes.  If we’re talking about archers, as opposed to guys with bows, I disagree.  If we’re talking about based on the volume of arrows flying, Id also disagree – most experienced archers fire more arrows than the average guy with a bow (because they own more of them and can fire faster) – and they’re more honest or realistic about what hit and what didn’t.

[Hundrsut]

4.10.2 - If a blow strikes a sheathed weapon (i.e., one that is attached/hanging from one's belt or over one's back) or any other worn object, including baggy clothing such as cloaks, the attack is considered to have hit the fighter. A weapon must be in a fighter's hand to intercept an attack.


so i have been wrong apparently. when i started fighting i seen people calling garb and it was explained to me and i thought it was a "unwritten thing". I have never made someone take a melee hit that hit only garb, and i still wont, but i shall take the occasionally skirt hits and move on.

[Lady Krystal]

4.10.2 - If a blow strikes a sheathed weapon (i.e., one that is attached/hanging from one's belt or over one's back) or any other worn object, including baggy clothing such as cloaks, the attack is considered to have hit the fighter. A weapon must be in a fighter's hand to intercept an attack.


so i have been wrong apparently. when i started fighting i seen people calling garb and it was explained to me and i thought it was a "unwritten thing". I have never made someone take a melee hit that hit only garb, and i still wont, but i shall take the occasionally skirt hits and move on.

Meh, I'm not a fan of the rule. If I'm arching and I see I've clearly caught someone's skirt panel, or a cloak as they're passing through.. I'm not gonna be a dick and call them dead. I'm 99% sure I've called 'garb' on my own shots more often than I've had someone complain that I hit their garb and called a legit shot.

I'd almost propose to re-write that to state that if the weapon would have hit the fighter were the clothing not present then it's to be considered a good hit.

[Braxton Kai]

I don't mind Archers calling their shots when clarity is needed.

If I take a shot to the arm and KNOW its a shot to the arm and an Archer calls torso/head/leg/death, I take the arm because his call was not needed.

If I do not know, where I was hit or if I was hit and an Archer tells me "Arrow to the ___" I take the call.

My view has always been that in Dagorhir its on the receiver's honor to take and acknowledge the hit in melee so it should apply in all aspects of the game as well for uniformity.

[Squire Lizard]

Yeah, I do NOT like that rule either as it basically makes calling GARB on a shot that hits your clothes and not you moot. Which as most vets will agree, has been in the game for awhile while not being in the MoA. So GARB shots do not exist, as if it hits your garb then it hit you.

Also, I just wanted to say that not all the people who are on these boards are the entirety of the arching community in this game and I can assure you that the way you describe arching is NOT the way it is followed by all archers. If we clarified our rules, and took away the god power of archers I would be happy as I am also an avid archer. It wont make things more difficult, and would lessen the amount of arguments that people have regarding this. We all know that they happen, and that archers are looked down upon by a lot of fighters for this reason even if it isn't every archer who makes bad calls

[Whisper Moonson]

I could've sworn that 4.10.2 included language about the hit only counting if it would have landed had the garb/sheath/whatever not been there. I remember it being discussed at RWC XXIII, and most everyone liking it. 

[Squire Lizard]

I thought so too but apparently it did not go through. As I was not at said RWC I cannot say one way or another.

[stylgar]

I don't mind Archers calling their shots when clarity is needed.

If I take a shot to the arm and KNOW its a shot to the arm and an Archer calls torso/head/leg/death, I take the arm because his call was not needed.

If I do not know, where I was hit or if I was hit and an Archer tells me "Arrow to the ___" I take the call.

My view has always been that in Dagorhir its on the receiver's honor to take and acknowledge the hit in melee so it should apply in all aspects of the game as well for uniformity.

Braxton, that is exactly what the rule means, how it usually works, and how it's supposed to work. Archers shouldn't call unless the target took no damage. Fighters should take what they feel.  If they felt nothing, perhaps it was a light shot (I send mine with just enough oomph to get there. Since our rules call for magic nuclear arrows, I regard it rude to crank it in there). If my arrow hits with a butterfly fart, fine. I still gotcha.  I strive for honorable accurate calls, when I make them. I expect them to be taken.

[Braxton Kai]

Yup that's just peachy keen with me. Course how things "should"  go and how things "do" go can be different. I'm just saying if an Archer calls head before it even misses my face, I'm not dying unless the herald calls me dead. I don't see it too often though but there are some that will argue where they "can" call.

[stylgar]

I'd argue that they CAN call, but the heralds need to administer necessary correction toot suite.
Of course most archers will back down from a bad call.
In the event of Richard Noggin, the fault lies in a broken fighter, not a broken rule.
The best balance for the game lies in an absolute call, with heralds correcting those who abuse it.

As to the guy with a bow calling before it connected, serious and immediate smiting with yellow-tabard authority was needed last week, if not sooner.

[Janwin]

In the event of Richard Noggin, the fault lies in a broken fighter, not a broken rule.
The best balance for the game lies in an absolute call, with heralds correcting those who abuse it.

Well said.

[Whisper Moonson]

This might be a bit lawyery of me, but I figure you don't have to take a call that was made before an arrow was fired. There was no shot to call.

Any archer who calls a shot before it hits needs some reeducating. Gently at first (oh, that's how you're supposed to do it?), firmer if necessary (but the rules say... oh - I guess they don't), and with a banhammer in extreme cases (Hahaha! I have this power and I'm going to abuse it!).

[Inextirpable Kyrax]

I don't mind Archers calling their shots when clarity is needed.

If I take a shot to the arm and KNOW its a shot to the arm and an Archer calls torso/head/leg/death, I take the arm because his call was not needed. ...

My view has always been that in Dagorhir its on the receiver's honor to take and acknowledge the hit in melee so it should apply in all aspects of the game as well for uniformity.

Agreed on all points.  On the other hand, I've got a case where I'm going to have to watch a certain person more closely, as an archer or Herald.  Seems like any shot near the upper torso/upper arm is taken by him as an arm shot.  Now maybe that's what he flet, but when every shot over a two day event its taken exactly the same way you start to wonder.  Like I said, I'm just going to watch, and if my suspicions are raised, have a quick talk with the veteran fighter after the scenario is done.   

[Squire Ducky McFeelgood]

SO, just too make sure I understand this fully, cause its really important i do. I don't care about should of's or implied's...

If an archer makes a bad call (calling torso instead of arm is the major one), the fighter has to take the call (torso), even thou he knows it was wrong. (felt the hit and took it to the arm).

or is it

If an archer makes a bad call (torso instead of arm), the fighter can choose to take what he felt, even thou its against what the archer said.

[stylgar]

An honorable target will take an errant call.
An honorable archer will retract an errant call.
That's about as clear as I can make it, Duckworth.
Edit: a fighter can question a bad call. The honorable fighter is the one who caves.

[Squire Ducky McFeelgood]

And i agree, but mine is not a question of honor. Its rules lawyering to a very fine point. And i have a reason.

[stylgar]

The rules say the archer may call shots. And when Rule 1 says this is a game of honor, you can't quite remove honor from the rules. Take the shot, then inform heralds and/or realm leadership that they have a broken archer on their hands

[Jager]

just an idea, since the wording for melee hits was changed to sufficient force instead of noticible force why not make arrows require noticible force to hit. under the current rules if an arrow even touches me i have to take the hit even though if an arrow were to just graze me in real life i would not lose the ability to use that limb.

[Silk]

In real life the arrows flying at you would be going a lot faster to begin with. For example if I wanted to kill you for real I "could" use a 35# bow, but I would probably use something stronger. I would also be using an arrow head much smaller than the size of your fist.
We lose some "reality" to playability and safety.

If I had to make sure that all of my arrow hit with noticeable force through armor I'd be drawing to the maximum allowed distance every time. I'd be making punchier arrows also.

Archery hits have to be different than melee hits for everyone's safety. Of course if you'd like me to rail you full draw with every shot...

[Hundrsut]

*hint*

no you would not

[Syre Jari Kafghan the Dark Knight]

Jager - got it covered, Full draw on you every time.

[Stellaria]

I enjoy a good point-blank full draw.... *gets excited*

[Jager]

If I had to make sure that all of my arrow hit with noticeable force through armor I'd be drawing to the maximum allowed distance every time. I'd be making punchier arrows also.

Archery hits have to be different than melee hits for everyone's safety. Of course if you'd like me to rail you full draw with every shot...

i think archers should be pulling their bows to the max each time. i see the logic your argument that real arrows would be traveling faster but when you apply the same logic to melee one could argue that a real sword would be heavier and in the case of most "red" swords in real life would be heavy enough that just letting gravity be the only force involved would likely render said limb unusable. ie. if i were to take a real greatsword sharpened for battle i could kill you without using any of my own strength. i would only need to hold it by a pivot point and let it fall

[Jager]

Jager - got it covered, Full draw on you every time.

go for it bro. personally i believe that blue weapons should be head/face legal, im not gonna worry about an arrow

[Silk]

My first instinct was a much harsher diatribe regarding your attitude, it seemed counter productive. Instead I'm going to point out that you don't seem to know anything at all about Dag archery. We specifically teach at the Ragnarok archery class every year that you don't use any more draw than you need to to reach your target. It has been repeated on these boards numerous times. Opponents of archery constantly expound on how unsafe it is to even allow it in our sport and here you are blithely stating that we should max draw every shot. Read the rules. Read the forums. Talk to a veteran archer a while and maybe give it a whirl yourself and then tell me what you think archers should do.

[Jager]

though i have not arched myself i have been hit with plenty of arrows in every part of my body including point blank in the face. never once did it hurt even in the slightest, in fact most of the time i dont even notice arrow shots but because some archer claims to have hit me i end up dying. all im trying to do is even the playing field a bit by puting the honor back on the reciever of the shot like it is for melee, its much easier that way. im only calling for "noticable" force which just means only when one notices that they got hit do they take said hit. arguments for people not feeling hits due to adrenaline is covered by realism seeing as how in a real battle my adrenaline would be at a much higher lvl and i would still be likely not to notice a glancing arrow. if you would like me to prove such a thing at the next event i am at i shall have a real arrow and will simulate some glancing to see how it effects my movements. 

[Stellaria]

I'm thinking this one isn't worth the effort.

[Silk]

You don't need to prove that you could survive a real glancing arrow shot. In real life if I was just as bad ass as my Dagorhir persona I could probably take arrows to the arms and legs and still fight on with them sticking in me (I may eventually die from blood loss, but that's beside the point). That's just not how Dag rules work.

What you're saying isn't making any sense. If my adrenalin is up and I don't feel a shot I'm likely being thick, not realistic.

Please re-read your posts and put yourself in another perspective, any other perspective. To me it sounds like you're willing to do yourself actual damage to prove a point about the mechanics of a boffer game.

[Alric]

Arrows don't hurt because they don't have to. If you started requiring a minimum force threshold for arrows, I guarantee you'd start seeing firmer, heavier, more painful arrows hitting the field to compensate for people blowing off arrow shots. If you require a harder hit, people will build weapons that will hit harder, and the risks of real injury would rise.

We could probably allow full force arrow shots at point blank range with the arrows we have right now without hurting many people, but if arrows had to hit as hard as other weapons when shot from 50', they'd be really nasty from 5'.

[Inextirpable Kyrax]

Silk, clearly MasterJager is trying to do himself or herself damage.  That he/she would argue for head/face legal blue weapons just drives that point home. 

We have a safe game and we're going to keep it that way.  If we used real arrows, we'd have a lot less issue about blown calls on either side of the bow.  Just as if we used real steel we'd have a lot less rhinohiding.   

[Lykos MacGregor]

I like how everyone completely ignored Twinkles comments, even though she teaches Rag archery classes.

I you want archers to have the god power to override a fighters honor on the field, then you need to get RWC to change the rules again.  As it is written, and as my own realm plays, archers only call shots if you look confused.  if you disagree with an archers call, take what you felt.  Expect to get an arrow to the face next time.

If I were not on my cell phone, I would quote Twinkles post so that maybe those trying to push their interpretation as "consensus" would realize there is not just one answer here.

Ducky is asking for a consensus yet taking the first person to answer as truth.  It aint always so.

[Drakmor]

Just as if we used real steel we'd have a lot less rhinohiding.   

Exactly. Also, even if you were on the most massive adrenaline high ever, that's not going to prevent blood or limb loss...

[Inextirpable Kyrax]

I like how everyone completely ignored Twinkles comments, even though she teaches Rag archery classes.

Lykos, been inside too much lately?  Try reading the rest of the thread.  Most of the posts by veteran archers are agreeing with Twinkle.  None of us want to be that guy. 

[stylgar]

Lykos, yours is the minority opinion of interpretation of that rule. Most of the game sees "call their shots" as the operative phrase, with "clarity" as a descriptor. 30 years of playtesting have shown it works.
Although, in fairness, yours works except where an archer just barely gets the arrow there and it does not strike with enough force for the target to feel it. Under our rules, that is a legal hit.  And I submit that the archer has the power to "clarify" that the target got hit, and s/he doesn't need to have confusion: if the arrow deflects (or runs out of steam and brushes the target's leg on the way to the ground) with too little oomph for the target to feel it, it doesn't matter, it was a legal missile hit.

But again, we just quibble around the edges. See my post higher up about honor.

[Jager]

Arrows don't hurt because they don't have to. If you started requiring a minimum force threshold for arrows, I guarantee you'd start seeing firmer, heavier, more painful arrows hitting the field to compensate for people blowing off arrow shots. If you require a harder hit, people will build weapons that will hit harder, and the risks of real injury would rise.

We could probably allow full force arrow shots at point blank range with the arrows we have right now without hurting many people, but if arrows had to hit as hard as other weapons when shot from 50', they'd be really nasty from 5'.

im not saying arrows should have to hit as hard as melee weapons. im saying that arrows should have to hit with enough force that they are easily noticed in the heat of battle

[Alric]

Honestly, this is part of why I try not to shoot at people who are closer than 20' to me. I don't like gently lobbing arrows at people and yelling at them till they notice they're dead. I'd rather shoot the guy 25' away with a full draw.

[Janwin]

even though she teaches Rag archery classes.

Playing devil's advocate here, but that don't mean jack beyond that someone was more motivated than anyone else, or was picked to do it.

The "for clarity" doesn't mean that someone can just ignore it.  It adds to the statement that archers may call their hits to specify WHEN they may call their hits.  Namely, if clarity is needed.  The call is still valid, binding, and is expected to be taken.

That's how it's been for the decade I've played.  That's how I teach people to play it.  That's how I was taught to play it.

[Lykos MacGregor]

The "for clarity" doesn't mean that someone can just ignore it.  It adds to the statement that archers may call their hits to specify WHEN they may call their hits.  Namely, if clarity is needed.  The call is still valid, binding, and is expected to be taken.

That's how it's been for the decade I've played.  That's how I teach people to play it.  That's how I was taught to play it.

That is part of the big problem.  You can't interpret a rule based on how it has been done for a decade.  You can ONLY look at a rule as it is written.  A brand new realm starting in Fairbanks, Alaska does not have the benefit of being on the East Coast, nor do they have anyone who has been "Playing for the past decade".

What they DO have, is an MoA rule that simply states that Archer may call their shot for Clarity.  That can obviously, be taken in two very different ways.  One gives the archer the ability to have Herald/God powers over what the fighter felt.  The other interpretation simply tells the archer they may every now and then have to point out to a confused fighter what they think hit.

Lykos, yours is the minority opinion of interpretation of that rule. Most of the game sees "call their shots" as the operative phrase, with "clarity" as a descriptor. 

Prove That.  The farther away from the East Coast, the more people are agreeing with the second, more direct, interpretation.  Unless, of course, that person in the mid west or west coast originally came from Aratari.  Then they agree whole heartedly with the East Coast version.

Saying that something IS, doesn't make it so. 

I like how everyone completely ignored Twinkles comments, even though she teaches Rag archery classes.

Lykos, been inside too much lately?  Try reading the rest of the thread.  Most of the posts by veteran archers are agreeing with Twinkle.  None of us want to be that guy. 

I did read the entire thread, and most of the East Coast Vets completely disagree with Twinkles version.  Look at every post by Janwin, Alric, Stylgar, and Whisper.  Each of them agree that Archers should not HAVE to call shots, but they CAN and make it stick according to their interpretation of the rule, or on the fact that , "we have always done it that way".

I just disagree with this completely.  Since I am now on a real puter and can do it, I will gladly quote Twinkle and highlight her statement.

They call them and you take what they call.

Yeah, see, this is never how I was taught, nor how I taught it.  This is the "archers are gods/heralds" crap that people always bitch about.  Most archers have just adopted the "shoot them again" policy, wherein if their target did not take the shot, regardless of a call made, we fire another shot at them.  Taking hits has always been an honor system, and I see no reason to give archers the power to override that system.  "May call for clarity" is in there in the event that the person is wearing armor and/or didn't feel the hit.  It does not give the archers the final say.

Well, heck, I can't even highlight bit parts because all of it is so dead on.  What she is saying, and which many of us NOT from the East Coasters believe, is that Archers are no more able to break the Honor system that is in place in Dagorhir than anyone else.  If so many on the East Coast believe this to not be the case, then by all means, take this rule BACK to RWC and get it changed... again!  The "For Clarity" was just recently added... so maybe after we see just how badly this rule can be interpreted, it is time to go ahead and change it to what the "Majority" of Dagorhir truly think it should be...  Regardless of how one or two realms on the East coast play it.  It would be VERY interesting to see how such a rule change would be viewed by the whole of Dagorhir.

[Sir Mirelle of Narnia]

Argh are we really making this an East coast West coast thing? I feel like people should start throwing up some gang signs.

[Alric]

It's not east / west - Lykos is from Ohio, which is within a few hours of all the major east coast events.

It seems to be more of an old school aratari / others divide, to me. Definitely something that could be clarified in the rules, though the advice 'don't be a douche' should, I think, be enough to prevent any on-field arguments from arising.

[Sir Mirelle of Narnia]

I know where Lykos lives Alric, it's his heavy use of east and west that I was referring too. I'm kinda tired of that attitude from people, it's varying opinions not one coast or the other.

[Sir Magnus of Narnia]

It's not east / west - Lykos is from Ohio, which is within a few hours of all the major east coast events.

It seems to be more of an old school aratari / others divide, to me. Definitely something that could be clarified in the rules, though the advice 'don't be a douche' should, I think, be enough to prevent any on-field arguments from arising.

Alric for the win on this. Don't be that person. I mean at Father Christmas this year I tossed an arrow across the field and hit the dilly bobber on the top of Stells wool hat. Not crap it was an amazing shot. However its not a kill. I know too many archers that would bitch she did not take it.

[Judge Dredd]

We of the east will crush the westerners beneath our feet. Then, on to Greenland.

[Whisper Moonson]

Again, I'll just note that the rule says archer may call their shots... for clarity. As Lykos pointed out, there are two ways to interpret that. Doing a little backtracking through earlier rules, it seems that, indeed, the rules have long granted archers the herald-like ability to call a shot and make it stick. So there is some solid "legal precedence" for the old-school opinion.

BTW, I'm teaching my interpretation in Guilder (on those rare occasions I can get out to fight anymore). That is to say, I'm telling people to take any arrow hit they notice immediately, so the archer has no reason to make a call. If you're not sure if it was an arrow, look around. If you see an archer and they call a hit on you, take it. If an archer calls a hit on you that you didn't notice, take it. If you're an archer, don't call a shot if you don't have to. Someone taking a hit means you don't have to call it. If you do have to call something (deflection before hit, accidental interference, unnoticed hit, etc.), just call "No good!" if appropriate or "Arrow!" and maybe a target zone. If that doesn't work, shoot 'em again and notify a herald. And if you ever, EVER call a shot before it hits, ESPECIALLY if you call it before the arrow leaves your bow, you'd better call yourself dead and hang up the bow for the rest of the day/week/month/year/life.

TL/DR: archers got the power; archers should seldom ever have to use the power; everyone should play nice and honorable; Texans will shoot you twice if they have to.

BTW, isn't Greenland the other way?

[stylgar]

The "for clarity" doesn't mean that someone can just ignore it.  It adds to the statement that archers may call their hits to specify WHEN they may call their hits.  Namely, if clarity is needed.  The call is still valid, binding, and is expected to be taken.

That's how it's been for the decade I've played.  That's how I teach people to play it.  That's how I was taught to play it.

That is part of the big problem.  You can't interpret a rule based on how it has been done for a decade.  You can ONLY look at a rule as it is written.  A brand new realm starting in Fairbanks, Alaska does not have the benefit of being on the East Coast, nor do they have anyone who has been "Playing for the past decade".

What they DO have, is an MoA rule that simply states that Archer may call their shot for Clarity.  That can obviously, be taken in two very different ways.  One gives the archer the ability to have Herald/God powers over what the fighter felt.  The other interpretation simply tells the archer they may every now and then have to point out to a confused fighter what they think hit.

Under your interpretation, how do you handle it when, in the tar

Lykos, yours is the minority opinion of interpretation of that rule. Most of the game sees "call their shots" as the operative phrase, with "clarity" as a descriptor. 

Prove That.  The farther away from the East Coast, the more people are agreeing with the second, more direct, interpretation.  Unless, of course, that person in the mid west or west coast originally came from Aratari.  Then they agree whole heartedly with the East Coast version.

Saying that something IS, doesn't make it so. 

I like how everyone completely ignored Twinkles comments, even though she teaches Rag archery classes.

Lykos, been inside too much lately?  Try reading the rest of the thread.  Most of the posts by veteran archers are agreeing with Twinkle.  None of us want to be that guy. 

I did read the entire thread, and most of the East Coast Vets completely disagree with Twinkles version.  Look at every post by Janwin, Alric, Stylgar, and Whisper.  Each of them agree that Archers should not HAVE to call shots, but they CAN and make it stick according to their interpretation of the rule, or on the fact that , "we have always done it that way".

I just disagree with this completely.  Since I am now on a real puter and can do it, I will gladly quote Twinkle and highlight her statement.

They call them and you take what they call.

Yeah, see, this is never how I was taught, nor how I taught it.  This is the "archers are gods/heralds" crap that people always bitch about.  Most archers have just adopted the "shoot them again" policy, wherein if their target did not take the shot, regardless of a call made, we fire another shot at them.  Taking hits has always been an honor system, and I see no reason to give archers the power to override that system.  "May call for clarity" is in there in the event that the person is wearing armor and/or didn't feel the hit.  It does not give the archers the final say.

Well, heck, I can't even highlight bit parts because all of it is so dead on.  What she is saying, and which many of us NOT from the East Coasters believe, is that Archers are no more able to break the Honor system that is in place in Dagorhir than anyone else.  If so many on the East Coast believe this to not be the case, then by all means, take this rule BACK to RWC and get it changed... again!  The "For Clarity" was just recently added... so maybe after we see just how badly this rule can be interpreted, it is time to go ahead and change it to what the "Majority" of Dagorhir truly think it should be...  Regardless of how one or two realms on the East coast play it.  It would be VERY interesting to see how such a rule change would be viewed by the whole of Dagorhir.
[/quote]