Originally posted by Bosse de NageAn excellent idea! The men have fine voices and hearty souls, something rousing for the conflicts ahead I think. Yes, yes! A fine play to entertain me and keep them busy, wonderous.
Kindly don't burn them, they are a good source of tax however silly their beliefs. Then there are the pilgrims to consider. Chaos isn't all about blood-drenched altars and weird chanting, you know. If your men are bored, why not have them put on an impromptu pantomime? Some of my most ferocious warriors are transvestites. Nothing strikes terror ...[text shortened]... the heart of the enemy so much as the sight of pink skirts fluttering atop a heaving destrier!
Originally posted by StarrmanFeel free to use the Cathedral for the purpose. All I ask in return is 50% of the take at the door.
An excellent idea! The men have fine voices and hearty souls, something rousing for the conflicts ahead I think. Yes, yes! A fine play to entertain me and keep them busy, wonderous.
Originally posted by StarrmanYou will not, as all the monks are currently undergoing spiritual re-education in a converted monastery in the hills. Those that return will be priests of Chaos, loosely speaking. I'll have the relevant person contact you bearing my seal.
I'll have the monks take a collection.
Blood and souls for Aragon!
Originally posted by Bosse de NageHmm, perhaps a few peasents dressed as monks then? I can't be expected to have my men entertain wihtout due recourse...
You will not, as all the monks are currently undergoing spiritual re-education in a converted monastery in the hills. Those that return will be priests of Chaos, loosely speaking. I'll have the relevant person contact you bearing my seal.
Blood and souls for Aragon!
In the interest of full disclosure, I received this e-mail from the GM:
Hello,
This is the moderator. Thanks for your email.
I will look into this as you requested.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
GM
I assume that this is a generic response. I will post whatever further e-mails I receive regarding the matter no matter what their content and suggest KW do the same.
Originally posted by SuzianneYou don't seem to be able to read very well. The little "minor" point was the heart of message 2; given that it winds up not to be true it invalidates his point. Clas (who seems from his regular use of the forum to be one of the most experienced players) suggested that the GM be informed; he was. Also there is no reason to "fully disclose" something that is publicly available and thus already "disclosed". You might want to buy a dictionary and have someone a little smarter than you explain its uses.
And then, in the interest of FULL disclosure, there's this, from [medievalwars] Digest Number 1216:
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 15:35:02 -0000
From: "no1marauder"
Subject: Funny Bizness in Game MMW
Has any of the veteran players ever heard of a situation where a
new player enters a game, supposedly completely unknown ...[text shortened]... ent by offering only your little edited version of the entire picture.
You've been showing your incredible denseness with every post you make. What I gave was an accurate description of the game occurrences; your internet hero's personal vendetta is besides the point. Not a single poster said that they had ever heard of such a thing in another game except under unusual circumstances. KW has not given any such circumstances. Figure it out, loser.
1 edit
Originally posted by KnightWulfeYou never posted the content of your e-mail to the GM. Please do; I'm curious as to what lies you have concoted. Also since you are attempting to have me removed from BOTH games (again) if you had any sense of "honor" and fair play you would reveal to me what you are accusing me of, so I could respond directly to the GM. That way he would have both of our sides of the story.
I also received a generic response:
Hello,
Thank you for your email, which has been received successfully. You should receive
a response in 1-3 days, thanks for your patience in the meantime.
Mr G.M.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1 -
You don't seem to be able to read very well. The little "minor" point was the heart of message 2; given that it winds up not to be true it invalidates his point. Clas (who seems from his regular use of the forum to be one of the most experienced players) suggested that the GM be informed; he was. Also there is no reason to "fully disclose" something that ...[text shortened]... r unusual circumstances. KW has not given any such circumstances. Figure it out, loser.
The issue is that you only mention the parts of the story that support your claim. You do not mention any of our previous warring, that we are at war in the game nor that we quite obviously cant play well together. You also neglect to mention that I did contact said player and that there was a diplomatic session that occured PRIOR to any action taken in the game. Quintessential lawyer - Use only the data that supports your side of the story. Perhaps I will go to the yahoo group and post the rest and see what the other people there have to say then.
As to me giving you such circumstances - again, I am not going to explain the workings of my diplomatic sessions with you. You are not entitled to them, nor do you have any right to demand to know what occured. What bargain was struck with Poland is the business of myself and Poland and who WE chose to tell.
2 edits
Originally posted by KnightWulfeGo ahead and post there and stop whining about how I posted. I'd luvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv to see the other game players hear your ridiculous non-explanation; I doubt that they will be as thick as Suzianne, BuffaloBill and ATY.
No1 -
The issue is that you only mention the parts of the story that support your claim. You do not mention any of our previous warring, that we are at war in the game nor that we quite obviously cant play well together. You also neglect to mention that I did contact said player and that there was a diplomatic session that occured PRIOR to any action ...[text shortened]... at bargain was struck with Poland is the business of myself and Poland and who WE chose to tell.
Speaking of giving "only one side of the story" where's the contents of the e-mail you sent the GM?
And my being a "quintessential lawyer" was useful to you when you solicited free advice and information from me regarding sources of your state law for a personal matter of yours, wasn't it? Hypocritical jerk.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderAgain, your continued meaningless tirade misses (or rather "evades" ) the point. You mean they've never heard of such a thing in another game *under the conditions as you posted them*. You completely failed to include the fact that Bavaria and Poland DID get together and plan their first turn together. Given this fact, you have no point about Bavaria letting Poland come through Bavaria's provinces in the first place.
You don't seem to be able to read very well. The little "minor" point was the heart of message 2; given that it winds up not to be true it invalidates his point. Clas (who seems from his regular use of the forum to be one of the most experienced players) suggested that the GM be informed; he was. Also there is no reason to "fully disclose" something that r unusual circumstances. KW has not given any such circumstances. Figure it out, loser.
What you gave was not "an accurate description of the game occurrences". You left out everything that would invalidate your position and expose your accusation as meaningless.
(And oh, by the way, attacking me as illiterate and dense really helps your position and certainly argues your point for you... uh-huh... well, keep twisting your facts into the shape you want, and soon, NO one will believe anything you say... even Sicily...)