When I once posed the question "What is a Knight?" to Sir Aerek, I recieved a "hush, we are here to fight not talk philosophy".

Let us take a moment to consider that No - a Knight is not an Infernal, a Runewarden, a Paladin or an Unnamable. A knight is someone who wishes to dedicate themselves to being honorable, to improve themselves, and to search for challenge wherever they go. Like Sir Archaeon, fighting groups of adventurers. Its a mindset. Much of this varies between orders of course, and you cannot expect the same of a Gaian Knight as one from the Infernal Rite, for example.

When I was still in the guild of Knights I had this delusion - that the Infernals, Runewardens, Paladins and Unnamable were Knight classes. I have learned that no, these are now refered to as a Warrior class. So by the new definition a Knight can be of any class, and a member dont even need a single such Warrior class.

Close your eyes and imagine the historical picture of Knights fighting Dragons. What do you see? I see men and women in fullplate, wielding swords, axes, maces and shields as they fight of the malicious dragons, like Yudhishthira.

I would support, enjoy and even partake in a tournament between Dragons and the knight classes of old.

I will not look at people fighting Dragons in Psion, Alchemist, Occultist, Sentinel (with their own lesser-lesserdragon) or similar forms while calling themselves Knights.

The Guild of Knights needs to formulate what they are and strive to be, and not in a long post we all will skip to read, but in a form even a Savage will undertand. We have very skilled scribes in Mhaldor if you need support.

Regards,
Commandant Pleak, A'voth'd'Qavhresh of His Infernal Rite

Penned by my hand on the 3rd of Lupar, in the year 926 AF.