Copora Changes Regarding Knighthood

[Neorjin]

I have to say that I like this idea. From what I saw in CK, the system worked fairly well there. I am okay with the requirements for the non-CoK approved candidates.

One change I can think of however, I think that it should be the responsibility of the Guildleader of the Circle of Knights to inform other knights of the happenings of any meeting they may miss, instead of the other way around.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this issue?

[Hopper]

is there something wrong with the way things are now. if so what are they and where did this come from. the only reason i am asking is i think this kindom has some of the best kinghts in the whole realm of AMTGARD due to the proccess that we have now. it all goes back to the saying if something is not broke why try to fix it. i could be wrong in this aspect of the GAME because i am not a knight and i am not quilified to be one at this time. i guess what i am trying to say is i do not understand where all the changes are coming from after all these years of it working just fine. i understand that change is good at sometimes but all i hear it is for the betterment of the game. as i am a big gammer i have seen in alot of year that chnage is not a good thing for a GAME. let take D&D for example they have come out with some many book and different additions to that game that is hard to keep up with. when all the player that i have seen either play older additions because there was nothing wrong with them as they where.

thanks

G-Hopper

[Monkey]

i wish i had a better example of why monarch knighting someone w/o the approval of the COK is a bad idea..

only example i can come up with is Boots and Me for some reason get in an Arguement over grasshopper getting one of his belts. so out of spite i just go off and Knight grasshopper Knight of the (xyz).. Now grasshopper has accepted this honor not knowing the reason behind getting his belt was of Malice and just because i was trying to put a thorn in boots side.. After weeks grasshopper finds out that he didn't rightfully "earn" the circle of Knights approval of this belt even tho he meets the criteria of becoming a knight he is still lacking in the maturity of holding the "honor" of said belt because he needs to enter more AnS or needs to Clean up some of his Sword Skills or maybe actually run and clean up his own event..

Why would we Want to Cheat the Honor of Knight hood by Placing someone into a group of Peers that dont belive that he is ready Yet..


as much good as this change could bring, i'm almost sure that it would bring WAY more negative and possible more headaches to the knight circle than needed..

contrary to popular belief the Knight Circle doesn't vote on Person bias alone if that were the case the circle would be much smaller and some people that were in the "click" at one point and did something to not be apart of the "click" wouldn't have multiple belts..

i find it almost insulting that if this passes that the Monarch/King alone could hand out knighthoods like Masterhoods or Titles its almost a disgrace to the honor itself and to have achieved multiple Qualifying awards i would rather have the Respect of the Circle i'm getting pushed into than being pushed into a Den of badgers..

[Darken]

Well I'm not gonna sit here and post my feelings on this. It is a modified version of BL from what I can tell, so if they are wrong I guess this whole game is. If anyone wants my opinion on it I'll tell you face to face. I've got problems with both current ruling I have sat in a COK meeting so I know what I saw there, and I have some problems with the proposal. But from what I got to see the later one is my pick.

[Kluno]

I would ask to be notified of when the "vote" on this "ruling" will take place please.

[Arminius]

I have major objections to removing the COK from the knighting process. As it is, only 3 kingdoms allow the monarch to knight people without at least suggesting that they have COK approval beforehand (BL,BS, and CG).

I believe in checks and balances, and the system we have is the best I have seen in any corpora of Amtgard. Our system allows only those approved by the peerage and our monarch, who is suppose to be the voice of the populace, to be inducted as knights.

While I have done a great deal of overhaul work on the corpora, I do not believe in change for the sake of change. I have been trying to tuck the loose ends of the corpora, not alter it to what I envision to be the ultimate document of governance.

I do not see how this overhaul improves the kingdom, only the ways in which it creates an even greater margin for abuse of power.

[Arminius]

I would like to revise my earlier statement. Upon re-reading, I found the part that states that it is strongly encouraged that the candidate have the approval of the COK. This is similar to many other kingdom requirements.

While this makes me more receptive to the idea, I am still not for it. I can point to a number of instances when the Monarch has made a knight without COK approval, and the lasting reprecussions it has had on the person as well as the kingdom.

[SirHern]

the only reason i am asking is i think this kindom has some of the best kinghts in the whole realm of AMTGARD due to the proccess that we have now.

First and Foremost, yes we do have some of the best Knights in Amtgard, with exception of the statement

due to the proccess that we have now.

I agree.
To be very honest when you said why fix what isn't broken, I feel that it is broken. There is a large amount of the populace in this kingdom feel that it is. A large amount of people feel that there needs to be a check and balance for the Belted Circle. I feel that even the belted circle needs to have a check and balance. At the current time there is not one.

i guess what i am trying to say is i do not understand where all the changes are coming from after all these years of it working just fine. i understand that change is good at sometimes but all i hear it is for the betterment of the game

But that is where we will disagree it hasn't been working just fine. There are a lot of issues that most people don't care to discuss or wish didn't exist. These are issues which some people feel need to be corrected, and these need to be addressed. I am only doing what many have felt was right. I have been working on this for quite awhile.

i wish i had a better example of why monarch knighting someone w/o the approval of the COK is a bad idea..

only example i can come up with is Boots and Me for some reason get in an Arguement over grasshopper getting one of his belts. so out of spite i just go off and Knight grasshopper Knight of the (xyz).. Now grasshopper has accepted this honor not knowing the reason behind getting his belt was of Malice and just because i was trying to put a thorn in boots side.. After weeks grasshopper finds out that he didn't rightfully "earn" the circle of Knights approval of this belt even tho he meets the criteria of becoming a knight he is still lacking in the maturity of holding the "honor" of said belt because he needs to enter more AnS or needs to Clean up some of his Sword Skills or maybe actually run and clean up his own event..

Why would we Want to Cheat the Honor of Knight hood by Placing someone into a group of Peers that dont belive that he is ready Yet..

Actually there is a balance to that the only way that a monarch can knight some one with out the approval of the belted circle is if that individual has met the qualifications of that belt. Anyone who has not met them can not be knighted without the CoK approval and recommendation. Also what about the fact that the monarch is the one person who was voted into the position by the majority of the populace, doesn't that show some form of trust. I mean the king should be more than a figure head.

I would ask to be notified of when the "vote" on this "ruling" will take place please.

I would like to have this discussed and voted on at the next kingdom althing.

In Service

[SirHern]

actually the monarch only has say to whether a candidate can be knighted during their reign. The monarch has no say in whether or not someone receives a knighthood.

[Zander]

The major problem I see with this change should be obvious.

Say we make this change and a few years down the line Monarch A gets voted into office. Monarch A's friend complains that they havn't been recognized for all they've done... being a good friend Monarch A gives the friend a Master (XYZ). Monarch A's friend is then denied a Knight's belt by the circle because they don't show the attributes of a knight. So three months later at the next event Monarch A just knights the friend anyway because now they have a piece of paper that says Master (XYZ) and that makes them"qualified."

There are to many avenue's for blatant abuse of this power since a Monarch can give a Masterhood to whoever they believe has earned it then turn around and Knight that person at the next event without the concent of the C.O.K.

I think a lot of people assume that a Master (XYZ) is the same a Knight of the (ABC) they just have to wait to get the belt. This just isn't the case...
A person who does amazing calligraphy and consistantly gains high scores in Quals and A&S events is a Master Dragon, no doubt about it. But when that same person does amazing calligraphy but also does applique and leatherwork and on top of it all goes out of their way to help people get to their level of craftsmanship and is always teaching people at the expense of their own time instead of using their time to get more awards. That person is a Knight of the Serpent. At that point they've shown obvious skill in the arts and sciences, but they've gone above and beyond to help the game as a whole, they've shown charity by helping others instead of pushing for personal goals, they've shown leadership by teaching others at the expense of their time. A Masterhood is not a stepping stone to Knighthood. Yes you need one to be qualified but having one does NOT make you qualified.

Before you try and change something you have to really look at the situation. Who would be better to decide who is ready to be a Knight than those Knights who have come before them.

[Monkey]

Im not sure if you just didn't understand my example or Over looked the part where i said he was Qualified,, how often do we have multiple people running for Monarch and Regent? Since the floating crown, it has been these past two elections. rarely in the past has the King and regent ran with any opposition, not just because we didn't have a "floating crown" the kingdom monarchy could be from any Land within Golden Plains.

With that being said i can see "Joe blow spiteful" run for King unopposed and get king because Financial Real life gets in the way of anyone else running. So "Joe blow spiteful" goes through back records of "Aint showed up in a damn long time" and needs a master hood, then he/she will be qualified so Joe Blow gives master hood at Stepping up. Then at End reign "Joe" knights "Aint showed up in a damn long time but now is Qualified" and all that "aint" had to do was show up twice because "joe" called "aint" and now we have a Flake in the Knights circle that most likely will just quit after starting a load of BS...



I'm not saying that this or any abuse of your system will happen but the chance is there and it rests in one persons Hands..

I've been waiting 8 years for my kingdoms Circle of knights to Vote on me and to achieve the honor of becoming among the peerage of Knights. That way i may voice my opinion on what/who i believe is a knight in my eyes, for my opinion to matter on who becomes a knight not just because they are qualified but, because they truly have earned the title. Just to see this come up and practically spit on everyone that has been Knighted before me, that has went from first order to their master hood, that had to grow up in the game and earn the title Knight makes me Sad. This change isn't for betterment of our Kingdom it isn't change for change sakes, its a lame idea to get Friends Knighted and makes the title close to meaningless. I really try to look at both sides of every proposal to make sure I'm making the right decision. I don't see the good on the other side of this proposal it Wreaks of abuse and taking away the Circle of Knights Voice in who comes into the peerage.

[Naomi_Silverflame]

[quote=Darken] It is a modified version of BL from what I can tell, so if they are wrong I guess this whole game is.[/quote]

That's a little like saying "the way Texas is run is the way every state in the US should be run." It's not going to work; New York is not Califorina is not Texas. They're all states but they're run differently for a reason. The same goes here. What works for one kingdom is not necessarily the best thing for the other kingdoms, no matter that BL is our source-kingdom. Just because they have their way of doing things does not mean we have to do them that way, or that their way is right for us.


As for the proposal, I strongly dislike the idea of closing out the COK from the knighting process and putting the Monarch in instead. There's way too much chance for abuse of power, not to mention i can see this causing alot of strife if the monarch wants to knight somebody the COK does not see as ready yet. If i ever get a belt, i want it to be because the COK think's i'm ready, not because i'm some monarch's friend.

[Neorjin]

No system is perfect; the current system has its flaws as well. All it takes is for one group to gain a majority to simply block anyone they do not like and pass through their friends. While they may not be able to force the knighting, but they could simply wait until one of their friends becomes Monarch and pass through unqualified people anyway. This and other vote tampering/intimidation tactics could be used to control the Circle of Knights in such an instance.

One problem I haven't seen brought up is knighting the current Monarch. I assume the GoK would take over responsibility, but then, who would approve the knighting?

Flavor-wise, I like the idea of the King knighting someone over that of a knight (no offense to the knights of the squires, this is a purely RP preference. I imagine most people will disagree with me on this point. I believe a quote I heard once to the contrary, “Kings do not make knights, actions do.” validates them).

I like the idea of this decision being given more to the populace as well. This makes the choices for Monarch more important, and gives the people more of a say in the matter. Also, just seeing this issue come up for a vote to the populace is nice, allowing us to see what they have to say about it.


I am glad to see people's opinions on this matter.

[Thurg Ironfist]

it seems that everyone is worried about some abuse of power in one way or another but regardless of the system in which people are knighted or awarded any type of major award or recognition of anything, there can always be an abuse of power, there is always room for a "corrupt" decision, I like the fact that a Golden plains knights belt is harder to get than anywhere else, it shows when you get it you really deserve it.

I dont know about removing the CoK completely from the process of Knighting. They are Knights they know what it takes to get that belt.
They're input is extremely valuable.

And as for Monarch A, giving random guy a masterhood and belt for whining and crying about, if that said person does get his belt then noone will recognize him as aknight anyway, he's just some douche who cried and got his way and happens to where a fake white belt.

A knight has to be a knight in the eyes of the people, A knight is a vessel of the people, they represent the very best, that a kingdom has to offer, and i belive the golden plains has some damn fine knights.

Lets not ruin it with a bunch of watered down belts

[Zander]

The people in our kingdom might realize that fact and not respect the persons belt, but when that person goes to IK events wearing a Golden Plains Knights belt, people assossiate that Knight w/ our Kingdom. And if that Knight appears as a whiny crybaby, other kingdoms will just assume that our kingdom supports that... I don't know about you but I like being from a kingdom people respect. If this passes, that respect will go out the window.

[Darken]

Ok I've seen 2 knights post on here with good opinions. I believe I'm the only non-knight posting on here that has sat in a COK meeting to hear reasons on a vote. This may piss some people off but heres what I personally witnessed.

All the knights that were their gave me the reasons that this person either deserved thier belt or not. I made my decission on this fact, I brought up a list of reasons that from outside the COK I didn't see why this person was a knight. I then asked the Knights what have I not seen , and am I wrong on my reasons. All the knights that voted no had a bigger list of reason than I did of why it's a no vote. The knights that voted yes never once denied my reasons they couldn't battle the truth, I got 1 or 2 reasons why they voted yes which were reasons I would have to push my boundries even to give an award to the person for the actions. But one thing I heard from every yes vote was this "This person is my friend and has really grown up / or matured". That quote right there was the storngest point to give this person a belt. So I ask you is that quote there the reason people should be Knighted? Does that quote there make a respected Knight? If so then most of ya'll are fighting a mute point.

I do like what Thurgs had to say

A knight has to be a knight in the eyes of the people, A knight is a vessel of the people, they represent the very best, that a kingdom has to offer

This is very true, but who should make this decission? A biased Monarch, or a biased COK? Neorjin made a good point about a group of knights controlling a knights circle, one thing that I saw that was left out. One of the knights at my COK meeting said "we arn't the majority so we can't swing a vote" if anyone believes this then get your head examined. ie. we have only 4 votes so I go to another knight hey we will give you 2 votes to your canidate if you give us 2 votes for ours. Get the picture people.

And if ya'll don't believe this has been happening for years then I guess the labotomy worked like it should have. I heard the term watered down belts, after hearing this info how many of thoses watered down belts do you think are floating around this Kingdom, or at least have been handed out. Prob more than you relieze. So again a mute point.

No matter which way you go about it you are gonna have the problems of biased belts being given out. But with the biased COK giving belts only, then you better know " who's dick to suck to get your belt" (sorry for saying that but I've heard that quote a few thousand times in the past few years. Theres no reason to hide what everyone knows and says now.) With a Monarch with that opprtunity you still have a chance for biased belts and dick suck belts, but you have a chance to get belts to people that constantly blow away everyone with the work they do, and don't give up doing it for decades. These are the people that deserve that belt and I wouldn't call it watered down, it's not their fault they don't wanna work on thier knees for thier belt.

Me personally I could give a rats ass, I do what I do cause I like to play the game. If I did have the choice I would perfer a COK vote of yes on my belt, but that doesn't change my opinion on the current COK, and it doesn't mean that the way this kingdom gives its belts is bullshit. Cause from what I've seen personally I lost much respect for alot of belts being worn, and I lost much respect from the COK as a whole. But as for me after saying this I will still walk around with my head up high, and I will never bow to the will of anyone for a belt in a damn game.

The choice in the end is up to you people, only ya'll can vote on whats right, only ya'll can make this game what it should be. And by all means make up your own damn minds.

[Kluno]

I would like to know when this "vote" will be held. I would like to attend that meeting........I am so sorry, Darken, that you have lost respect for my belt....I have NEVER done anything to dishonor my belt and will never allow anyone else to dishonor it. I feel that I stood in front of my peers and was granted a pass.......I did not "suck dick" I earned mine the old fashioned way by WORKING MY ASS OFF FOR IT.

[Wretch]

There will always be a way to disrupt the system one way or another, regardless of the means. To be quite fair, I have not seen one knighting in Golden Plains that had complete and utter support from the entire kingdom. We all have to accept this and move on.

Sir Hern's proposal has merit. However, I would suggest that there would be a checks and balances system provided by the individuals that the knight themselves would serve, and that would be the populace of Golden Plains as a whole.

In the event of a knighting by the Monarch without the Circle of Knights majority approval, wouldn't it be prudent to then have a vote by the kingdom populace to counteract the "You're the monarch and my friend, so you can knight me" concern? Whether it be decided by a standard majority or 2/3rds, giving the people of the kingdom the final say in whether they want that person in question to receive their Knighthood would create a counter balance. This way, the person in question is beholden to the people themselves, because it is by the populaces approval and faith, and not just the authority of the Kingdom Monarch, that they where the belt of knighthood.

Just my opinion, but I hope it is considered.

In Service,

Lord Squire Wretch
~ Count of Dark Oasis

[OTTO VON MUELLER]

it be decided by a standard majority or 2/3rds, giving the people of the kingdom the final say in whether they want that person in question to receive their Knighthood would create a counter balance. This way, the person in question is beholden to the people themselves, because it is by the populaces approval and faith, and not just the authority of the Kingdom Monarch, that they where the belt of knighthood.

So we have, let's say, Option B where:

5.51 Only the Monarch of the Kingdom may knight people into any of the four Orders of Knighthood. Although not required, it is strongly suggested that candidates have the approval of a majority of active/eligible Knights (see 3.45).



5.511 If the Kingdom Monarch bestows an Order of knighthood on someone prior to the approval of the majority of active/eligible Knights, the person being knighted MUST meet the criteria set forth in the most current Award Standardization Process listed in the Rules of Play.



Quote:
NOTE: The above limitation holds fast the otherwise unlimited Monarch’s discretion found in the Amtgard Inc. core document, and so it is also unlike the unlimited Monarch discretion found in the other lands of Amtgard. GP will be the most demanding of the Monarch when this discretion is exercised. That is, Masterhood/Warlord is not strongly recommended as it is elsewhere but required for the Monarch to bestow knighthood prior to CoK approval.

Would become:

5.511 If the Kingdom Monarch bestows an Order of knighthood on someone prior to the approval of the majority of active/eligible Knights, the person being knighted MUST meet the criteria set forth in the most current Award Standardization Process listed in the Rules of Play and MUST have approval of a 2/3 majority vote at Kingdom Althing.

That would seem be a well-reasoned option to consider to the original proposal.

[Zander]

That would ruin the suprise of being knighted... Half of the reason why we do it the way we do it is that the Knighting can be planned ahead of time and be a surprise for the person being knighted... if they show up to the allthing vote, this goes down the drain...

[Monkey]

* Anubis Sutekah Devilboon
* Archamedies Pohe
* Bag'em
* Balisk
* Bearrug
* Boldwen Reinholt
* Boots
* Caleom
* Colin
* Drake Malkov
* Dustin Darkenmane
* Euric Bloodstone
* Flynn Lyton Telemon
* Guy Kasama
* Hern Sablewolf
* Ivar Nefarious
* Jacobi
* Jeddak Jeran
* Jynx Mercades
* Kamal Mustafa
* Karyllon Illyrica Radmoor
* Katlina
* Lith Galahd
* Moonshadow Everdarius
* Nakita
* Neorjin
* Netzai
* Nomad Fishslayer
* Ren
* Sasha
* Shefanhow
* Sylvas
* Taiga Takasha
* Vaargard Malorius
* Vagabond
* Vasa Wolfrider
* Warblade

these are all 37 of the Knights of Golden Plains.. take out those that are not Active Members of the Golden Plains (represented as Underlined) and there is roughly 14 members of the Circle of Knights, out of those 14 Knights can you honestly say that any one of them would take "dick sucking" as payment for their Vote? and to touch on what darken said we'll give you 2 votes if you give us 2 votes... Thats a little petty tho i dont doubt that it has happened however if that has and might have happened it was most likely Personal bias against the person that needed the votes from one side or the other instead of they genuinely deserve it.

not having the approval of the circle of knights be apart of the Knighting process is a dumb idea..the monarch having all the power to knight someone is a dumb idea. Something needs to happen to this proposal that gives a bigger checks and balances than 1 person deciding who becomes a Knight. 14 people will not always see eye to eye and when arguments and sides have been discussed and a Yes vote has came from 14 people each with a different View on what is a Knight then that its self is a major checks and balance.. if the monarch says hey this person is qualified i'd like to knight him then gets shot down because the CoK decides the person isn't mature enough or hasn't fully become a knight in their eyes the monarch can just go ahead and do that.. its ridiculous..

maybe i'm just ranting and not bringing up Valid points against this proposal but thats how this proposal makes me Feel..Its almost disrespectful that after all this time (and after getting knighted through this System yourself Hern -Neorjin) that this would be brought up..

[Thorshammer]

All the knights that were their gave me the reasons that this person either deserved thier belt or not. I made my decission on this fact, I brought up a list of reasons that from outside the COK I didn't see why this person was a knight. I then asked the Knights what have I not seen , and am I wrong on my reasons. All the knights that voted no had a bigger list of reason than I did of why it's a no vote. The knights that voted yes never once denied my reasons they couldn't battle the truth, I got 1 or 2 reasons why they voted yes which were reasons I would have to push my boundries even to give an award to the person for the actions. But one thing I heard from every yes vote was this "This person is my friend and has really grown up / or matured". That quote right there was the storngest point to give this person a belt. So I ask you is that quote there the reason people should be Knighted? Does that quote there make a respected Knight? If so then most of ya'll are fighting a mute point.

i do believe your response to this was to deny the alowance of said belt to be given during your term. Effectivly vetoing the belt for your term or terms as Monarch. The next monarch will have to be approached and give his/her yay or nay thus allowing the populace a voice in the process...

in opposition to this current process it is wished to put in a rule wherein a single person has all the say? this arrangement lacks any balance at all... I see the merit in desiring that the populace of the kingdom have some say... but hasn't that already been expressed by the veto? and as it currently stands anyone can petition to bring someone up to the CoK for discussion. I realise this means a few people who deserve belts may not receive them but i for one would rather have a few Knights that no kingdom can question the value of rather than alot of shake and bake knights just because some single entity feels their friends have done enough...

[SirHern]

Yes I was knighted in this system, and as a knight in the system that we are discussing. There are to many flaws in it. There are the flaws of personal bias, there are the flaws of the "clicks" there are a lot of flaws that unless the system is changed will never stop or be corrected. if you feel that I am being disrespectful of my belt then I am sorry, I am doing what I feel any knight should and that is to correct wrongs that are occurring. As A knight I am sworn to serve the kingdom, and the kingdom is the whole group not just a small section of it.

[Iago]

[5.51 Only the Monarch of the Kingdom may knight people into any of the four Orders of Knighthood. Although not required, it is strongly suggested that candidates have the approval of a majority of active/eligible Knights (see 3.45).

The above the sam as in BL corpora and many others, and allows for the Monarch to have way to much power alone when knighting. I have seen the good and the bad in this, I have seen monarchs who have walked straight into the CoK and openly stated they would not knight anyone without the CoKs approval (The extremely good) seen in GV, BL, DS, CG, and NW. I have seen a Monarch knight an unqualified individual without discussing with the CoK, because they wanted to knight someone (The bad) BL, and have heard of a Monarch going against the CoK because they could and knight someone anyway (The extremely bad) don't remember where (long time ago).

5.511 If the Kingdom Monarch bestows an Order of knighthood on someone prior to the approval of the majority of active/eligible Knights, the person being knighted MUST meet the criteria set forth in the most current Award Standardization Process listed in the Rules of Play.

While this is a step up, I don't agree with it. I have seen a a King award a Master Rose and a Flame knighthood one right after the other without it being discussed with the CoK at all. Not even a heads up as to that was what they intended to do, GV 99'. Again to much power, leaves open loopholes.

5.513 The Kingdom Monarch may designate a Knight to perform all or a portion of the knighting ceremony.[/b]

There was a portion of the current GP Corpora left out that goes hand in hand with this statement. Currently GP requires a knight to make another knight, and if the Monarch isn't a knight then it falls to the GMCoK. I have seen this go back and forth, and can see where some would feel it meaning more coming from a knight rather than a squire or someone not in a belted lin at all. However, I think that this practice of it being mandatory to be a kngiht to perform the cermony takes away from good things a Monarch gets to do.

3.424 Unless the Kingdom Monarch indicates she/he will be unavailable, the Kingdom Monarch MUST be present at every Circle of Knights meeting. This demands the Kingdom Monarch be included in the scheduling process for these meetings.

The Monarch has no business being there UNLESS, it is someone that they (the Monarch) has brought before the CoK to be discussed, is specifically invited because the CoK is having a hard time deciding which belt, or they request the monarch there for opinion because they are at a deadlock, and finally because the CoK has decided one way or the other on an individual and the CoK is letting the Monarch know who they did and did not decide one, so that the Monarch may specifically ask why someone voted no, when the rest of the CoK voted yes (or vise verse) when making thier decision. Ex....CoK votes 6 for 1 against OTTO gettign his flame belt. Darken wants to know why Kamal voted no on OTTO when everyone else voted yes, prior to making his decision. This IS NOT a MUST situation, this is a MAY situation. Not to mention, that if you were to have the ruling of where the Monarch MAy award knighthood without CoK approval, if they have the masterhood then you have cut the CoK out completely, and go back to the Monarch having full power.

3.481 Other than the Kingdom Monarch, the Guildleader is the only one who may call Circle of Knights meetings.

Again, Monarch has no business calling a CoK meeting, they can request to be included in the meeting, or ask the GMK to hold a meeting with them present, but they should not be allowed to call a CoK meeting if they aren't the GMK. If they aren't a knight they have no business calling the meeting.

3.482 Shall break all ties in Circle of Knights meetings, and shall only vote in the event of a tie.

Eh---Most not all circles do this anyway, again I don't think they shouldn't be ab;e to vote at all, however, they shouldn't get 2 votes either allow them to vote last, either way they get to vote. Thier vote and reasoning why could be all the difference to the Monarch as to whether they decide to approve or not.


With all of that said above. I think your simple answer to a good check and balance is already in place for GP. Whether people like the decision or not, the CoK voted yes on a person earlier this year and it isn't happening with the current Monarch, which is his right as Monarch. Maybe after his reign things change, maybe the person changes during the monarchs reign and the monarch changes thier mind. In this particular situation, both the CoK had thier vote, and the Monarch was able to keep final say.

Had it been the other way around and Darken wanted to knight someone and the CoK didn't feel they were ready, he couldn't because he isn't a knight.

If anything I would sipmply put the change to state that only the Monarch may award the honor of knighthood, with approval of the CoK.

And then you go from there with if another person actually conducts the cermony or not. And you have your checks and balances.

[Iago]

Ex....CoK votes 6 for 1 against OTTO gettign his flame belt.

Correction this should be 6 to 1 for Otto getting his flame belt.