On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Malcolm wrote: > >Perhaps it is his nature of being "not there" that is the issue. >Attacking from behind appears to be a common theme as "bad," as even >Aliera and Morrollan agree on that. Perhaps Kragar did just that. >He has a history of attacking from the rear, although perhaps not >intentionally..his opponent simply didn't see him at all. > Hmm. That does seem a little more probable than any of the "military failure" scenarios. It's not that he's cowardly or unable to command, but that he's congenitally unable to fight the way a Dragon should. Now, I can counterargue that Kathana e'Marish'Chala didn't face House expulsion for murdering the Marquis of the Pepperfields, but perhaps Kragar did it a little too often, or too much, for it to be explained away? So, perhaps Kragar kills someone prominent (or several persons), and when brought before the court, swears under the Orb that he issued the challenge out loud, and is telling the truth, and witnesses say that no, the victim never saw him coming, and *they're* telling the truth. So, perhaps Kragar is found "not guilty", but the Dragon Council decides to punish him anyway? (Especially if the victims were *members* of the Dragon Council, now that I think of it...)