>Ask yourself this. Does embracing prayers of priests include
>allowing shamans to summon your prey to your snare?

No. Would it have been different if I wasn't there? He was still in my group and still used my snare..the situation doesn't change though.

>Accepting sanctuary is bad of course, accepting healing is
>bad of course, is them summoning for you bad? You make the
>call. I know for a fact that villagers have been kicked out
>for allowing a paladin to summon people out of a cabal
>during a "raid" situation, do you think allowing Danical to
>summon me for you in the dwarf forest is worse or better
>than what villagers have been kicked out for?

That wasn't my question. I group summon with the rest of the offensive communes a priest has. If it is ok for them to use wither, poison, blindness or whatever next to me, then summon is fine too. Again this is coming from me the player, not the character. Character wise Im not going to tell him what he can and cannot commune, its not my place, and I think its rather hypocritical to say that a shaman can't summon but yet he can do any other supp as long as it isn't on you.

>Now allying with sylvans is yet another shifty thing in my
>book, but that is me. You have shamans and bards and
>warriors hanging around wearing magic stuff and having
>pendants and magical preps and everyone seems to look the
>other way. Oh and disregard that their cabal embraces mages
>as well.
>
>This is a disagreement between the new age ragers and the
>older ones. I would treat sylvans as temp allies at best,
>not attacking them but also not embracing them wholeheartily
>like the village has been doing recently. The combo raids of
>Maran/Sylvan/Battle just scars the village's supposed best
>warriors of the land and the independance that comes a long
>with it. I experienced one raid where a shaman who is still
>alive now came with two other paladins, a sylvan bard and
>warrior, and a rager warrior who is still alive now and they
>proceeded to summon me out, gang me, and when I unghosted,
>summon me out, gang me again. That is 6 on 1 and we didn't
>even have the sceptre because they came previously and got
>it! Is that cool in your book? What is being a rager mean to
>you? Not using magic but being cool with prayers that
>emulate magic. I would think you would be at LEAST a little
>bit suspicious of it and at most saying, "You do that again,
>I will kill you for disrespecting me".
>
>The village has turned into a mob of flunkies who beckon to
>priests and mage protecting warders. They no longer stand
>alone and stand for the "Best of the Best". What happened to
>"If I can't do it with my own kin then it is not worth doing
>because it would mar my reputation and history of battle".

Try to not preach to me on why you are jaded against current ragers. This wasn't me, and honestly I don't care. I've had enough ragers to know how to play them.

>Whatever, you find it cool to have shamans and paladins
>summon for your ragers, that is cool. I just hope Thror
>opens his eyes and uninducts you for it.

Again, we are back to the SINGLE incident, a shaman.

>Beyond those
>instances, I didn't have much interaction with you nor could
>I facilitate any because you were always camoed. I comment
>on what I experienced. As to that short time we did interact
>where you wanted to change how we viewed each other, I was
>so tainted by your previous action I had no faith at all in
>your proposal. Oh well.
>
>Go

Thats really a shame I guess.

Gabe