Patch Preview Questions.

[Jaycy Ashleana]

Who, specifically, was involved in these "discussions" and decided these changes?

What is the reasoning behind the removal of the Baron's Council RP mechanism and subsequent unilateral assignment of the senior baron for defense purposes?

What is the reasoning behind not allowing a character to challenge for the same barony twice in a row, especially given the artificial restrictions of two challenge rights per cycle and the 14-day wait period? What if someone challenges, loses, doesn't challenge again until 2-3 cycles later but they want to challenge for the same Barony (either for SL reasons or because the Barony has a new holder); do they still have to challenge someone else, first?

Why aren't lowering the number of "test"-free challenges and removing the "loyal wall" mutually exclusive? What is the reasoning behind removing the "loyal wall" RP mechanism other than 'no more need for extra test-free challenges'?

What is the reasoning behind requiring champions to be on standings in order to stand as champion? The Overlord/Ren Baron knowingly takes the risk of choosing someone not on standings; whoever is not on standings would simply have no fancies. This inhibits a specific RP mechanism of allowing the Overlord/Ren Baron to use IC political connections to get the best champion for the particular situation. Challenges can and do get fought between one standings posting and the next. Requiring a champion to duel could also "tip off" a challenger or defender, too.

What is the reasoning behind the 6 EST time? Is that fairest to everyone who duels and not just those who live on the East Coast?

[Red urThorne]

So if twenty people sign up for the WLT it will still be double-elim? That basically means if you work and live on the East coast you're screwed.

(Beyond that, I like the removal of the SoA but need to be active on the standings thing. I don't find all the changes objectionable, I like playing in the WLT but I can't be up until 4AM when I wake up at 6 for work. )

[PrlUnicorn]

Changes to SoA and Challenges

* The Show of Activity (SoA) will no longer be a requirement to challenge.
* SoA is replaced by "Challenge Rights."
* The cost of a challenge is” (1) One Challenge Right = Challenge Baron, (2) Two Challenge Rights = Challenge Overlord.
* Each Warlord, upon ranking to Warlord on the standings, is awarded 2 Challenge Rights per cycle.
* You are required to duel -ONCE- every cycle to continue to gain these rights.
* If a duelist goes through a cycle without a duel you will be taken off the standings and placed on the Old Duelist List.

So far, so good. A lot of people have been asking for the removal of the SoA. The last one there just changes the current two cycles for standings removal to one. Does it need to be specifically stated that that rule applies to everyone including title holders?

* Upon reinstatement a Warlord must wait 14 days following their first duel for eligibility to challenge. This duel will be verified by way of the Shift Reports and does not have to wait for the Official Standings.
* Warlords are unable to challenge the same Barony twice in a row. (I.E. Seaside, and then Seaside again.)

Since the Loyal/Renegade system is remaining in place, wouldn't it be only be Renegades that would actually benefit from that decision as Loyals would still only have to defend once a month?

* Warlords, should they fail in their challenge, must wait 14 days before they can issue another.
* Barons, should they fail to defend their challenge, must wait 14 days before they can issue a challenge.
* Titleholders (Barons/Overlord) who lose their challenge are eligible to issue a challenge for that Title they failed to defend following the 14 day wait. (I.E. The Former Baron of Seaside may challenge to Seaside after 14 days)
* The 14 Day Recess period begins upon the updating of the Official Standings.

Unless I am misunderstanding, if one fails to defend a Barony and is returned to Warlord status, unless their WoL record places them at a lower rank, they automatically get the two Challenge Rights for Warlords. Is there a rule in place to prevent people from taking advantage of the system to retire a barony, gain the challenge rights back, and lather, rinse, repeat several times during a cycle? Call me a cynic, but stranger things have happened.

* When Challenging the Overlord, The Overlord has the right to appoint anyone as champion to test the challenger provided they appear on the current standings.
* Renegade Barons have the ability to defend a Warlords right to challenge Barons or Overlord.
* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint anyone as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.
* Warlords are unable to appoint a champion for any tests.

It should be Warlord's right not Warlords right.

Overlord and Baron Challenges and the Council

* A Barons Council will no longer be required to provide votes / judgment on challenge issues.

This would remove certain RP aspects, albeit rarely used ones, of playing a Baron.

* If the Overlord is stripped while under challenge, the Senior most Baron will defend it.
If defended, the title will go to a Baron's Tournament. This is the only tournament allowed to decide the Overlord.
* If a Baron is stripped while under challenge, the Senior most Baron will defend it.
If defended, the title will go to a Tournament decided by the Administrative Staff.

Why the Senior Baron? I get the whole time in service thing, but they might not be the right choice at any given time. What's the protocol if the Senior Baron is unavailable?

Changes to Alignment System

* Loyal / Renegade System stays in place
* Removal of the ability for a "Loyal Wall"
* An Overlord is still able to test challengers
* An Overlord is still able to intercede on challenges to Barons
* Changing the word "Intercede" to "Test" for both situations
* The Overlord Grant remains unchanged.

Define Loyal Wall? Requires permission from a Renegade, who gives up the right to challenge for a cycle to challenge the Overlord. The Loyal Wall was a rare thing in the first place, I don't see why it needs to be completely eliminated.

There's no real need to change the wording as those in use already define which circumstance is in progress.
Test of Worthiness - whether or not the Overlord believes a Warlord is worthy to challenge for and/or hold the title of Overlord.
Intercession (interceding) - Overlord coming to the aid of a Loyal Baron. (i.e interceding on their behalf)
What's being proposed there is a dumbing down.

Standings:

* The DoS Standings will be considered Official on Thursday, 6PM EST. If they are posted before then, any challenges made before 6PM EST on Thursday will be considered null and void, allowing other challenges to be issued properly.

While I agree that an official time should be set to allow all players with eligible characters a chance to challenge, I'm not sure I agree with 6PM on Thursday. That's one of those things that will always leave someone unhappy.

Events 2014

* Halloween Havoc: Up To 8 Challenge Grants may be given to those who complete an event task, Event pending. These challenges are eligible for testing.
* DoS Madness: Test Free Grant to winner and Second Place. Grants become Non-Test Free grants if given out to others.
* Warlord Tournament: Shall now always be in a double elimination format. Previously this was up to the person running the tournament.
* Talon: Remains a single elimination tournament. Is no longer limited to 16 entries but may accept as many as wish to enter.
* There are several other events planned, but there are details that must be worked out. It is possible, however unlikely, that they will be awarded a test-free grant.

Grants for Madness should be Test free regardless of who gets them. If one is able to transfer a prize to someone else in a contest, the prize remains intact, such should be the same with Madness. The person that earned it worked their tail off to get it, the person they choose to give it to should gain full benefit from their generosity.

Additional Notes:

* DoS Madness is the super bowl of DoS. A Test-Free Baronial challenge will be awarded to the winner and a Test-Free Baronial to Second place. Those who are gifted a grant by a Victor or Baron who wins are eligible to be tested.

Again, I think the earned prize after six straight weeks of winning tournament matches should not be diminished if the Overlord or a Baron cannot make use of them and opts to gift them to someone else. It just got to the status of test free, it should remain that way.

Any dispute that is not clearly covered under the preceding rules shall fall under the jurisdiction of the Duel of Swords Supervisor. This Judgment shall be considered final and may only be overturned by the Dueling Coordinator.

To clarify, is the Dueling Coordinator umbrellaed under the title of Forum Supervisor?

[PrlUnicorn]

So if twenty people sign up for the WLT it will still be double-elim? That basically means if you work and live on the East coast you're screwed.

WLT organizers might want to consider the option of running the tournament over two days. It's been done in the past.

[Kalamere]

G,

Is this patch list open to discussion and potential change, or is this just notification of things you already consider a done deal?

Just trying to get a sense of things before I write anything further on it and waste either of our time if there's no point.

Thanks,
~Kal

- edited to more clearly get the question across and remove language that may have been construed as inflammatory.

[Arthour]

I don't think the idea of changing the Baron's council is a great one, then again it's not often it gets used and if the last time the Baron's council met is an indication it isn't always considered a fair proceeding.

What I really don't get is the Standings bit. If you're trying to say that the standings should be updated after Thursday 6pm EDT, then say that. Saying that they aren't official before a set time and date is..Almost cheating people out of what they've earned. If the standings are updated, they are updated.
I don't think that is a thing that's been discussed over two years, and certainly not with the community.

Now, if this is a decision because the person responsible for the DoS standings is most likely to update them on Thursday, around 6pm? Please say that. We're understanding adults and actually, having a set time where we know the standings are supposed to be updated is a good thing. Having a time where the standings can only be considered as updated and legit, regardless of when they are updated, is not so good a thing.

[Teagan]

The decision to make the standings official and one specific time every week is to level the playing field for everyone. Nobody can cry foul about a standings keeper posting the standings at different times a day and suggest that they might be doing it to benefit themselves. Challenges are on a first come, first serve basis and being the only person who knows when the standings will be updated gives you a distinct advantage. I'm not saying anyone has done this or anything, but I am a fan of the transparency.

6:00 pm est might not be the most convenient time for YOU, but at least you know when it is.

[Arthour]

That's a really good reason for that, and in hindsight I think my post came off a lot more confrontational than it was supposed to and for that, I apologize.

Back on point, after discussing the standings rule change with two or three people, I think it's a good thing to have. Sorry again if I came off harsh

[G]

I received requests for clarification a while back. I apologize for not getting to this sooner. Hopefully these will answer the majority of the questions brought up overall.

I should note that the preview is pretty much a done deal. The only alterations would likely be to the details. Things that have changed (But are not reflected on the preview patch notes yet) are a change to a length of time after failed challenges of 14 days being changed to 7 days, Renegades only being allowed to appoint Warlord champions instead of anyone on the standings, being unable to challenge the same Baron twice in a row in the same cycle, etc. Most of it will be covered below.

Question 1: * The DoS Standings will be considered Official on Thursday, 6PM EST. If they are posted before then, any challenges made before 6PM EST on Thursday will be considered null and void, allowing other challenges to be issued properly.

This is only when something wouldn't be updated until the new standings, right? Like if Gren defeats Morgan Thursday, no one can challenge Gren for OL until the next Thursday at 6 pm. But since there's barons currently challengeable, like Aya, Claire, Jake, Napoleon, they can still be challenged on any day as it isn't contingent on the new standings, right?

Or if a baron changes loyalty, it isn't in effect until the new standings come out, right? What if Shadowlord changes his alignment to loyal on Tuesday, the Shadowlord/Teagan duel is slated for Wednesday, can Morgan intercede or not?

How does this affect a baron's right to immediate challenge if the Overlord changes his/her alignment from renegade to loyal? Does the newly renegade baron have to wait until the standings reflect this to challenge, and does this right to immediate challenge supersede all others regardless of time stamps? "

Can, at anytime, switch the alignment of a Loyal Baron with reason given in writing to all Barons and to the Standings Keeper provided a WoL record of 15 is maintained. If the Overlord should banish a Loyal to a Renegade alignment, then the Overlord must accept an immediate challenge of title if issued by that Baron. This challenge will supersede any other challenges, including that of a WLT winner."

Q1. Part A:
Should a challenge match take place after the Standings are considered official, that Result is not considered complete until the next standings. I.E. If Gren defeats Morgan on Thursday night, Morgan will still be considered Overlord until the next standings. She would be allowed to test challengers for Loyal Barons. All other unchallenged Baronies remain the same. This will also apply to all alignments. Example, if Gren defeats Morgan, a Baron may declare renegade to him, but will remain loyal to Morgan until the next standings are posted.

Any Barons who are eligible before the standings remain so. Nothing changes there.

Q1. Part B: Providing a post is made on the forums, switching alignments to Renegade will be considered official instantly. A Renegade Baron must publicly petition on the forums and be publicly accepted by the Overlord to be Loyal. The Baron will be instantly recognized as Loyal upon acceptance of the Overlord. All challenge rules then apply upon these alignment switches.

Question 2: Renegade Barons have the ability to defend a Warlords right to challenge Barons or Overlord.
* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint anyone as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.

Does this overwrite the current rule that says a renegade has precedence over another renegade's champion?
"Renegade intercession takes priority over a Renegade Baron's champion. The first Renegade Baron to state intention to intercede shall have precedence. Though not a requirement, the time and date of the sending of a letter delivered to the Standings Keeper declaring the Baron's intention to intercede shall be the only proof accepted on this issue."

It does.

Renegade Barons may only choose a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as a champion in a test from the Overlord. Warlords do not get to choose a champion, but a Renegade Baron may step in on their behalf.

Question 3: What is the rationale for changing intercession to test?

For the sake of simplicity. Too many questions come up in regards to intercession vs test and which means what. People have used both terms interchangably both correctly and incorrectly. To do away with this issue, it's simpler to just make it one word. An Overlord can test Loyal Baron's challenger, and the Renegade Baron can Counter the test.

Question 4: * Titleholders (Barons/Overlord) who lose their challenge are eligible to issue a challenge for that Title they failed to defend following the 14 day wait. (I.E. The Former Baron of Seaside may challenge to Seaside after 14 days)

"Does this effectively give the losing baron a grace period? So no one can challenge the new baron until the 14 day period has expired without losing baron challenging? Or can a warlord still challenge once the standings are posted (assuming they have the challenge rights to do so) and the losing baron is out of luck?"

First, it should be noted that the length of time is being changed to 7 days. Regarding the question, The victorious party in a challenge match does not receive a grace period. The Losing Baron would not be eligible to issue any challenges for 7 days after the standings reflecting the challenge results are posted. I.E. Aya loses her Barony on a Thursday the 7th. The standings reflecting this will be posted on Thursday the 14th. She would not be eligible to issue a challenge until Thursday the 21st. Loyal Barons can only be challenged once per calendar month(The new Baron would be able to be immediately challenged in the example above on the 14th) and Renegade Barons still will have a queue. The 7 days is only for the loser of the challenge.

Question 5: * There is a 30 Minute leeway given to duelists in a challenge to arrive after the scheduled time. (I.E. Challenge is scheduled at 8pm, you have until 8:30 before the following rules commence)
* If an Overlord, Baron, or Challenger fail to arrive to at the scheduled challenge time, they are given 7 days to complete the challenge. No extensions beyond this will be given. Should one fail to show at the second appointed time, the missing party or parties will be stripped of their title/grant.

Q5. Part A: OK, just thinking about this because of things like this happening in TDL. What if the first scheduled time it was the challenger that no showed, so seven days later, the challenged doesn't show? (or switch challenged in the first time, challenger second time).

This is more difficult, and a valid question. At this time, we are looking at it as a 7 days only extension. Whichever party fails to show on the second challenge would be considered forfeit. By the time the reschedule is made, everyone involved should know to allow time to be there for the challenge.

Q5 Part B: And... I assume extensions/exceptions can be granted on a case-by-case basis, but what if I had a challenge scheduled, the challenger no shows, but I'm going on vacation so can't get it scheduled within seven days?

Extensions and Exceptions will be on a case by case basis. I would recommend, however, that should a vacation be looming to not schedule a challenge at the last minute. Providing advance notice, however, is appreciated and would be taken into consideration. I.E. A challenge is issued, "I've got a vacation coming up in two weeks." At this point, I would hope that the challenge match is not scheduled on day 14 just to have one no show.

Question 6: On the part with not challenging the same barony twice. "* Warlords are unable to challenge the same Barony twice in a row. (I.E. Seaside, and then Seaside again.) "

Is that in the same cycle? What if I challenge for New Haven in August, then next March I want to challenge for New Haven again and didn't press any other challenges in between?

I *think* the intention here is to avoid harassing/targeting the baron using zerg tactics (throwing bodies at your enemy until the enemy runs out of defenses). I know it confuses issues, but could (assume they are both warlords) Morgan challenge for New Haven, lose, then Napoleon could challenge for New Haven? If so, it doesn't really avoid harassing/targeting the baron if someone has 5 or more warlords and effectively gets 10 challenge a cycle to target someone they don't like OOC. All it really does is stop a 10th ring/Var thing where he would constantly challenge for the 10th ring because he thought it was his.

So I guess my real question is what is the intention behind restricting a warlord from challenging the same barony twice in a row? And does it hold if the barony switches hands?

A Warlord will be unable to challenge for the same Barony twice in a row within the same cycle. ( ie: Challenge for Seaside once, lose, Challenge for Seaside again.) They could, conceivably, challenge for Seaside at the end of one cycle, lose, and challenge for Seaside at the beginning of the next. That scenario is alright, as they would not be able to challenge for that Barony again in the second cycle with exception to the following rare example:

End of Cycle A
Challenge Right used to challenge for Seaside
Beginning of Cycle B
Challenge Right used to challenge for Seaside
Second Challenge Right used to Challenge for New Haven
WLT Challenge Grant used to challenge for Seaside
All in the same cycle.

The main intention for this is to allow for the ability for others to challenge for that Barony instead of having it locked up by one character. In the example given of 10 Warlords for one player, this does cut it down to potentially 5. Right now the most characters under one player ranked Warlord is 3. So while that would allow three challenges, it can also be considered an unlikely scenario to be abused. However should it be abused, we can address it then. While I don't anticipate a rush on one individual Baron at this time, it is something I will closely watch. Especially as there are those who could have many Warlords taken off the inactivity list.

We also don't know everyone's alts. And while we do know quite a few and most people don't seem to keep it secret anymore, I don't want to be that intrusive. If they are known, then we can address that situation.

Question 7: * When Challenging the Overlord, The Overlord has the right to appoint anyone as champion to test the challenger provided they appear on the current standings.
* Renegade Barons have the ability to defend a Warlords right to challenge Barons or Overlord.
* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint anyone as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.
* Warlords are unable to appoint a champion for any tests.

Historically, only the Overlord could choose anyone of any rank. Challenging Barons could only choose a Warlord as their champion. I believe that should remain unchanged. Overlord anyone. Challenging Baron a Warlord.

This is an acceptable point. We will be changing it to limit the Baron's choices to Warlord only. Also, see response to Question 2.

Question 8: Though I am not sure I think a Warlord should immediately be able to challenge upon gaining Warlord rank. They should at least fall under the 14 day waiting period a Baron does upon losing their title.

It's been considered, and as we feel that the new Warlord has put in their time and effort to gain 15 WoL to earn the rank, they have earned that challenge. There is no anticipation for this to be abused as there are not many characters that are closing in on the Warlord rank at the moment.

[G]

Please note: These rules become active today. If there are any questions, feel free to ask either via IM or PM to Apple or myself. There will be some time before the actual rules page can be updated. This is currently being worked on by myself.

[DUEL Apple]

Main post has been updated to read.

Renegade Barons may only choose a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as a champion in a test from the Overlord. Warlords do not get to choose a champion, but a Renegade Baron may step in on their behalf.

* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.

First, it should be noted that the length of time is being changed to 7 days. Regarding the question, The victorious party in a challenge match does not receive a grace period. The Losing Baron would not be eligible to issue any challenges for 7 days after the standings reflecting the challenge results are posted. I.E. Aya loses her Barony on a Thursday the 7th. The standings reflecting this will be posted on Thursday the 14th. She would not be eligible to issue a challenge until Thursday the 21st. Loyal Barons can only be challenged once per calendar month(The new Baron would be able to be immediately challenged in the example above on the 14th) and Renegade Barons still will have a queue. The 7 days is only for the loser of the challenge.

* Barons, should they fail to defend their challenge, must wait 7 days before they can issue a challenge.
* Titleholders (Barons/Overlord) who lose their challenge are eligible to issue a challenge for that Title they failed to defend following the 7 day wait. (I.E. The Former Baron of Seaside may challenge to Seaside after 7 days)
* The 7/14 Day Recess period begins upon the updating of the Official Standings.

Edit: Edited to fix an error in "* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings." Now correctly reads "* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings."

[Artemus Kurgen]

Main post has been updated to read.

Renegade Barons may only choose a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as a champion in a test from the Overlord. Warlords do not get to choose a champion, but a Renegade Baron may step in on their behalf.

* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.

First, it should be noted that the length of time is being changed to 7 days. Regarding the question, The victorious party in a challenge match does not receive a grace period. The Losing Baron would not be eligible to issue any challenges for 7 days after the standings reflecting the challenge results are posted. I.E. Aya loses her Barony on a Thursday the 7th. The standings reflecting this will be posted on Thursday the 14th. She would not be eligible to issue a challenge until Thursday the 21st. Loyal Barons can only be challenged once per calendar month(The new Baron would be able to be immediately challenged in the example above on the 14th) and Renegade Barons still will have a queue. The 7 days is only for the loser of the challenge.

* Barons, should they fail to defend their challenge, must wait 7 days before they can issue a challenge.
* Titleholders (Barons/Overlord) who lose their challenge are eligible to issue a challenge for that Title they failed to defend following the 7 day wait. (I.E. The Former Baron of Seaside may challenge to Seaside after 7 days)
* The 7/14 Day Recess period begins upon the updating of the Official Standings.

Why the fly by night change in phraseology? This looks really shady.

[Claire Gallows]

Main post has been updated to read.

Renegade Barons may only choose a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as a champion in a test from the Overlord. Warlords do not get to choose a champion, but a Renegade Baron may step in on their behalf.

* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.

First, it should be noted that the length of time is being changed to 7 days. Regarding the question, The victorious party in a challenge match does not receive a grace period. The Losing Baron would not be eligible to issue any challenges for 7 days after the standings reflecting the challenge results are posted. I.E. Aya loses her Barony on a Thursday the 7th. The standings reflecting this will be posted on Thursday the 14th. She would not be eligible to issue a challenge until Thursday the 21st. Loyal Barons can only be challenged once per calendar month(The new Baron would be able to be immediately challenged in the example above on the 14th) and Renegade Barons still will have a queue. The 7 days is only for the loser of the challenge.

* Barons, should they fail to defend their challenge, must wait 7 days before they can issue a challenge.
* Titleholders (Barons/Overlord) who lose their challenge are eligible to issue a challenge for that Title they failed to defend following the 7 day wait. (I.E. The Former Baron of Seaside may challenge to Seaside after 7 days)
* The 7/14 Day Recess period begins upon the updating of the Official Standings.

Why the fly by night change in phraseology? This looks really shady.

You mean other than the fact those changes were there from the get go in G's updated follow up post before this took effect? I'd say it was a matter of making sure the main post aligned with the updates. Just saying

[G]

There's nothing shady going on here. There was just clarification in the original rules changes posted that were reflected in an update.

Think of it this way. The original rule changes were posted. Then an addendum posted following that one but the original rule changes weren't updated.

So, since it was brought up, the original wording was corrected to match up to the addendum.

It was pretty clear to start, we just made it more clear because a question was brought up. It's not changing rules right on the fly because anyone just happens to feel like it. It's correcting the wording of the original rules to match a previously posted correction.

I'm sorry I never edited the original rule set to comply with the revision. There's nothing shady. There's no conspiracy. There's nothing odd going on.

If there is something still confusing about the rules and addendum's as they're written, any and everyone are welcome to bring it up in a civil manner and it will be addressed.

[Artemus Kurgen]

Main post has been updated to read.

Renegade Barons may only choose a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as a champion in a test from the Overlord. Warlords do not get to choose a champion, but a Renegade Baron may step in on their behalf.

* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings.

First, it should be noted that the length of time is being changed to 7 days. Regarding the question, The victorious party in a challenge match does not receive a grace period. The Losing Baron would not be eligible to issue any challenges for 7 days after the standings reflecting the challenge results are posted. I.E. Aya loses her Barony on a Thursday the 7th. The standings reflecting this will be posted on Thursday the 14th. She would not be eligible to issue a challenge until Thursday the 21st. Loyal Barons can only be challenged once per calendar month(The new Baron would be able to be immediately challenged in the example above on the 14th) and Renegade Barons still will have a queue. The 7 days is only for the loser of the challenge.

* Barons, should they fail to defend their challenge, must wait 7 days before they can issue a challenge.
* Titleholders (Barons/Overlord) who lose their challenge are eligible to issue a challenge for that Title they failed to defend following the 7 day wait. (I.E. The Former Baron of Seaside may challenge to Seaside after 7 days)
* The 7/14 Day Recess period begins upon the updating of the Official Standings.

Edit: Edited to fix an error in "* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings." Now correctly reads "* Renegade Barons, when challenging the Overlord, have the right to appoint a Warlord or another Renegade Baron as champion when tested by the Overlord provided they appear on the current standings."

Quoting this to denote the removal of Renegade Baron as champion and that it was edited back in. I apologize for my initial reaction, the rules are still new and being learned. The change in phrasing caught my attention more than anything, it wasn't my intent to intentionally cast an accusation on Apple's player. I dealt with this exact thing during Hydra and am more apt to raise this kind of concern now than ever.