City and Guilds - Goals and Consequences

OleisOleis Producer EmeritusMember, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
edited January 1 in Aetolia Development
In the couple days since the Leaders meeting, I've been speaking with many of you and Aetolia's staff to further solidify our design of the City Novicehood system. I have left some details vague in hopes of sparking more interesting ideas from player and volunteer feedback, and that has worked quite spectacularly in some cases. Unfortunately, it has also allowed misinformation to spread and misconceptions to grow, which is not unusual.

Perceived problems:
  • Because novices require more effort and support when they're confused than a normal guildmate would, smaller guilds can struggle to help new players acclimate.
  • City assimilation and advancement are largely self-motivated, which allows players to fall off the radar or stagnate.
  • Cross-city guild membership presents conflicts of interest, stifling potential for antagonistic and diplomatic roleplay.
Goals:
  • Allow new players to benefit from larger city populations when learning the ropes of Aetolia and kickstart city advancement.
  • Build lasting relationships between helpful city members and new players, even after they leave novicehood.
  • Allow guilds and cities to focus more on their fundamental theme and mission in the game world, promoting compelling roleplay between organizations.
With these areas for improvement and these goals in mind, I am committing to the following changes:
  • Guild Novicehood will be removed as a concept. New players in the introduction will select their class, then be sorted into the city appropriate for that class (except Shapeshifter and Wayfarer). At the completion of the city Academy (pending changes to that system based on city/guild leader feedback), they will leave novicehood and automatically join the appropriate guild at GR1.
  • After joining the guild, new members will have 72 hours to leave class with no lesson penalty.
  • The Ambassador will serve as city Head of Novices, and his or her aides will serve as Novice Aides.
  • Each city will gain a tutor for each class it hosts, allowing citizens to apprentice under the multiclass system for the usual fee. Guilds will be able to choose whether or not they sanction as usual.
  • Members of a guild may not join cities other than the one hosting the guild. Guild membership is not required to be a citizen, and citizenship is not required to join the guild.
I understand that the last two points will be controversial, given the friendliness between similarly-tethered cities and the roles you have built as such. However, we feel that it's important to the future of our storylines and the health of the game as a whole to reinforce organizational identity. We will be having meetings with each guild and city to help refine those identities and give any support we can in better communicating them to the world. Many of you have reached out to that end, and I think it's a no-brainer. Further, as we implement these changes, there will be a 4-week grace period for players to roleplay the natural consequences of the changes and make organic decisions about which allegiance their characters value most.

I'd like to invite your questions and feedback here and in private messages, however you are most comfortable. If you do choose to post here, please keep in mind forum rules and the goal of having a dialogue with the administration. Arguing amongst yourselves is not likely to reap productive results.
You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
[---]
"^," Slyphe agrees with you.
Post edited by Oleis on
RazmaelKelliaraKerrynLinEmelleMazarineHadrakZailaRunasRizgarKodazaMegiddo
«1345

Comments

  • KelliaraKelliara Member Posts: 469 ✭✭✭✭
    Just as a question of clarification, since I missed the meeting:

    When you say each guild members must be citizens of their host city, is this also counting for class? I.e. can a non-guilded person holding say the Cabalist class live in Bloodloch?
    Now with 253% more Madness.
    Chibi-Kelli by @Eleanor.
  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    edited January 1
    Kelliara said:

    Just as a question of clarification, since I missed the meeting:

    When you say each guild members must be citizens of their host city, is this also counting for class? I.e. can a non-guilded person holding say the Cabalist class live in Bloodloch?

    There are no requirements on class within the same tether, only guild membership.
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
  • TozToz Member Posts: 2,153 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Oleis said:


    Members of a guild may not join cities other than the one hosting the guild. Guild membership is not required to be a citizen.

    This stings, especially given the post I JUST made in that other thread, walking down memory lane and talking about what the Carnifex means to me. I'm losing all of that, with this change, and while I agree it's for the best of the game, it's not for the best of me, and it's not for the best of most of the Carnifex guild. Right now they're going to be losing 3/4ths of their officers 100%, and probably going to go 4 for 4 on it, as well as a good chunk of their membership. In fact, the only two who have said they'll STAY is the GM and a Soldier. That's going to be a very, very lonely guild in the coming weeks, and it sucks to see what I felt like was my 'legacy' being destroyed.
    (Oasis): Azzello says, "I'll still never forget the first time I saw Toz throwing hammers."
    (Oasis): Azzello says, "I freaked out and thought they had somehow managed to pull me into them."
    (Oasis): Azzello says, "So I tumbled away from my team and into theirs."


  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    edited January 1
    Toz said:

    Oleis said:


    Members of a guild may not join cities other than the one hosting the guild. Guild membership is not required to be a citizen.

    This stings, especially given the post I JUST made in that other thread, walking down memory lane and talking about what the Carnifex means to me. I'm losing all of that, with this change, and while I agree it's for the best of the game, it's not for the best of me, and it's not for the best of most of the Carnifex guild. Right now they're going to be losing 3/4ths of their officers 100%, and probably going to go 4 for 4 on it, as well as a good chunk of their membership. In fact, the only two who have said they'll STAY is the GM and a Soldier. That's going to be a very, very lonely guild in the coming weeks, and it sucks to see what I felt like was my 'legacy' being destroyed.
    As I looked at our other games and the organization winnowing they've done to condense their populations, I wanted to form a plan that let me make necessary changes without deleting orgs. It's not lost on me that one of the more populous and active organizations is the one that is about to experience the most change. What I'm interested and encouraged to see is what happens during the transition period and afterward. With smart cityleaders in both Bloodloch and Spinesreach, I foresee a Bloodloch renaissance and a shakeup of the Spirean status quo. At least one player has mentioned forming a Carnifex ex-pat community in Spinesreach, and I think that's awesome.

    As much as I'm grateful for your ability to see the overall benefit, I understand your personal conflict and I'm sorry for it. By definition, though, a legacy is something that sticks around in your absence, and I think you're absolutely going to see the strains of what you, Moirean, and Xenia (should she leave the guild rather than Spinesreach) created in the guild for years to come.
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
    LinEmellePilarRunas
  • PhoeneciaPhoenecia Somewhere in AtticaMember Posts: 475 ✭✭✭✭
    I don't know if the last two points are worded poorly but with cities getting class tutors for each of the classes they hold, will those classes effectively be inaccessible to anyone not a citizen or will guilds still be able to apprentice and give out class as they do already?

    And number two: is citizenship required to be a member of a guild? If so, no thanks. I'd rather be a rogue again than be forced into joining a city my character doesn't care about. And if that's how it's going to be, you can bet that other guilds will have members who'd rather quit than be forced into an org where they don't fit. Which means more empty guilds, more rogues, and a looot of unhappy people.

    The other thing that this would impact is variety and diversity within guilds. Done wrong, with guilds and cities so tightly linked, what you'll end up with is very homogenous guilds with very little variation between individuals. It also makes it extremely easy to encourage hammering down the nail that sticks out.
    Leana
  • LeanaLeana Member Posts: 84 ✭✭✭
    My question is in regards to people who do not login during this period. Will they eventually login to find they've been booted or will a system be put in place, similar to how Magi splitting went, where they can have a personal grace period to adjust?


  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    Phoenecia said:

    I don't know if the last two points are worded poorly but with cities getting class tutors for each of the classes they hold, will those classes effectively be inaccessible to anyone not a citizen or will guilds still be able to apprentice and give out class as they do already?

    And number two: is citizenship required to be a member of a guild? If so, no thanks. I'd rather be a rogue again than be forced into joining a city my character doesn't care about. And if that's how it's going to be, you can bet that other guilds will have members who'd rather quit than be forced into an org where they don't fit. Which means more empty guilds, more rogues, and a looot of unhappy people.

    The other thing that this would impact is variety and diversity within guilds. Done wrong, with guilds and cities so tightly linked, what you'll end up with is very homogenous guilds with very little variation between individuals. It also makes it extremely easy to encourage hammering down the nail that sticks out.

    I have hopefully clarified the points you mentioned in my post. The multiclass system is not changing. We're simply offering NPC tutors who can apprentice, open to city members. Being cityless is also still an option. I'm not expecting all guild members to be happy cogs in a machine, but it's important that we don't have guild members entirely at odds with the city they're meant to be representing.
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
  • LeanaLeana Member Posts: 84 ✭✭✭
    Oleis said:

    We're simply offering NPC tutors who can apprentice, open to city members.

    Will guilds be able to set some sort of roleplay ritual for apprenticeship. Nothing too complex, but I'd prefer that the training of a new Shaman/Syssin/Mage to not be, 'You're a Shaman now, !'. It would be nice for a little paragraph or a few emotes to make it feel more involved.

    I feel like it takes away from the meaning of a class if you can be a guildless citizen and just suddenly be trained in all three classes, despite your relationship with them.
    Oleis said:

    ...but it's important that we don't have guild members entirely at odds with the city they're meant to be representing.

    Isn't there some way to just have this policed by guild leaders? It sounds like conflict anyone can have, as being at odds with the city you represent can still happen if you're also part of the city. Instead of some sort of storyarc, most players will join a city they hate and have 100% no interest in and use their video game ability to CTOFF to focus on their guild. Which is 100% more sad than simply having a handful at odds with their guild's host city.

    I understand the potential allure of this change, but I don't think many see the real damage it will cause. I also don't think it needs to be the entire guild. This should be reserved for leadership in an organization. If you're the GM or a Secretary or even the Patron or even Guildranks higher than 1, you should be within the host city or give up the ability to lead. In that scenario, a few non-leaders within a guild who are aggressive or negative about the host city can be removed or dealt with by the loyal leadership.


  • PhoeneciaPhoenecia Somewhere in AtticaMember Posts: 475 ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 1
    Oleis said:
    I don't know if the last two points are worded poorly but with cities getting class tutors for each of the classes they hold, will those classes effectively be inaccessible to anyone not a citizen or will guilds still be able to apprentice and give out class as they do already?

    And number two: is citizenship required to be a member of a guild? If so, no thanks. I'd rather be a rogue again than be forced into joining a city my character doesn't care about. And if that's how it's going to be, you can bet that other guilds will have members who'd rather quit than be forced into an org where they don't fit. Which means more empty guilds, more rogues, and a looot of unhappy people.

    The other thing that this would impact is variety and diversity within guilds. Done wrong, with guilds and cities so tightly linked, what you'll end up with is very homogenous guilds with very little variation between individuals. It also makes it extremely easy to encourage hammering down the nail that sticks out.
    I have hopefully clarified the points you mentioned in my post. The multiclass system is not changing. We're simply offering NPC tutors who can apprentice, open to city members. Being cityless is also still an option. I'm not expecting all guild members to be happy cogs in a machine, but it's important that we don't have guild members entirely at odds with the city they're meant to be representing.
    That's the thing. I really don't think members of guilds are at odds with their cities at all especially with the main conflict of the game being Spirit vs Shadow, and unless the conflict gets shifted to city vs city instead, it will likely never be. The last time Duiran and Enorian were at odds or Bloodloch and Spinesreach was years ago during the war system when Duiran had an alliance with Spines. At that point? Yes. Some guild members had to choose loyalties. As it stands, Enorian and Duiran and Bloodloch and Spinesreach will never be at odds so long as they're on the same side of the overarching conflict.

    And as for not expecting all guild members not being happy, I think you underestimate just exactly how many people this is upsetting/pissing off. From what I've been hearing from people is that if these proposed guild/city changes go in? A lot of players will end up not just quitting their guilds, but leaving the game completely, which I think might ultimately hurt the game. You can't have a huge shakeup like this and just expect people to take it.
  • XeniaXenia Member Posts: 884 ✭✭✭✭✭
    To echo Toz. It stings, and I am left wondering what did I do wrong in the guild and what warnings did I ignore that eventually led to this upheaval. Seeing as the change in Carnifex leadership is so recent, it's definitely been hard to not take it so personally. Part of me is wondering in the case where so large of a guild's population is probably going to find itself misplaced, is there.....some sort of consolation prize? For instance, the Carnifex outpost that existed in SPinesreach, can that be purchased or transferred in ownership in some way?
    image
  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    Leana said:

    Oleis said:

    We're simply offering NPC tutors who can apprentice, open to city members.

    Will guilds be able to set some sort of roleplay ritual for apprenticeship. Nothing too complex, but I'd prefer that the training of a new Shaman/Syssin/Mage to not be, 'You're a Shaman now, !'. It would be nice for a little paragraph or a few emotes to make it feel more involved.

    I feel like it takes away from the meaning of a class if you can be a guildless citizen and just suddenly be trained in all three classes, despite your relationship with them.
    Oleis said:

    ...but it's important that we don't have guild members entirely at odds with the city they're meant to be representing.

    Isn't there some way to just have this policed by guild leaders? It sounds like conflict anyone can have, as being at odds with the city you represent can still happen if you're also part of the city. Instead of some sort of storyarc, most players will join a city they hate and have 100% no interest in and use their video game ability to CTOFF to focus on their guild. Which is 100% more sad than simply having a handful at odds with their guild's host city.

    I understand the potential allure of this change, but I don't think many see the real damage it will cause. I also don't think it needs to be the entire guild. This should be reserved for leadership in an organization. If you're the GM or a Secretary or even the Patron or even Guildranks higher than 1, you should be within the host city or give up the ability to lead. In that scenario, a few non-leaders within a guild who are aggressive or negative about the host city can be removed or dealt with by the loyal leadership.
    I'd love to have some RP flavor with the guild tutors, yes.

    The problem with the conflict of interest I'm talking about is that it results in a pre-emptive stifling of conflict. Leaders understand the implications on an OOC level and compromise their characters' roleplay to avoid starting issues that might resonate through their many allegiances. It's something that would make good storytelling if we were all forced to be totally true to our characters, but it results in a bland safety zone because we're (understandably) afraid to stir the pot. It's the same reason it was problematic to have cross-tether Orders: when you bring potential enemies together under a friendly umbrella, at least one of them has to abandon their ideals.
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
    Fezzix
  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    Xenia said:

    To echo Toz. It stings, and I am left wondering what did I do wrong in the guild and what warnings did I ignore that eventually led to this upheaval. Seeing as the change in Carnifex leadership is so recent, it's definitely been hard to not take it so personally. Part of me is wondering in the case where so large of a guild's population is probably going to find itself misplaced, is there.....some sort of consolation prize? For instance, the Carnifex outpost that existed in SPinesreach, can that be purchased or transferred in ownership in some way?

    This isn't a direct response to anyone's choices, it's a game design decision. We're in a position where we absolutely must make a broad, global change to ensure the health of the game, and there will always be corners on what we'd love to be a round peg. As for the outpost: if the guild wishes to negotiate a private sale to someone in-character, I can make that happen mechanically.
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
    XeniaLinEmelle
  • LeanaLeana Member Posts: 84 ✭✭✭
    One major thing needs to happen for this to even be possible for most of the Carnifex: Bloodloch loses its mandatory undeath.


  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    Leana said:
    One major thing needs to happen for this to even be possible for most of the Carnifex: Bloodloch loses its mandatory undeath.
    As I understand it, players are taking in-character steps to make this happen already. 
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
  • TozToz Member Posts: 2,153 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Leana said:

    One major thing needs to happen for this to even be possible for most of the Carnifex: Bloodloch loses its mandatory undeath.

    No, that's not it at all, but I get how so many outsiders see it that way.

    Except for tethers, the way Carnifex currently are? You could be from any city and join them as long as you a) put Carnifex first and b) did good work. Over RL years, and left entirely directionless after being released, the Carnifex turned into a meritocracy where your ability to fight/act as a member of the Keep was the only value that truly mattered. The three parts of the Code are purposefully vague - it's a militant group living in the mountains who worship strength and winning at any cost. Even the act of tethering it to a single city is going to require 1/3rd of the code be re-done, let alone any other changes - and it WILL need other changes.

    In order for this to 'work', the Carnifex would have to be left alone in this change, and it's not practical or reasonable to expect the admin to do that for us. Likewise, it is going to require a complete overhaul of the guild and it is not practical or reasonable to expect those of us who already DID set up the guild, make it active, make it work, etc. to do so again.

    I made the Carnifex my 'thing', I carried it when I was active and picked it back up every time I came back. Now it's just deciding between rogue or retire, because there's no other viable option.
    (Oasis): Azzello says, "I'll still never forget the first time I saw Toz throwing hammers."
    (Oasis): Azzello says, "I freaked out and thought they had somehow managed to pull me into them."
    (Oasis): Azzello says, "So I tumbled away from my team and into theirs."


  • RasaniRasani Member Posts: 119 ✭✭✭
    Unfortunately, I think that's the thing they're trying to change: That you guys feel a Carnifex could be from any city. It's not what the lore really points to, what with slaughter and enslaving of souls. They're likely trying to push Carnifex in a far more brutal direction, where it'd be damn hard to be from anywhere *but* Bloodloch. (I would assume Spinesreach could fit with that too, but they may even change the org more to make even that a stretch, who knows.)

    The Illuminai, to my knowledge, are about to deal with a similar issue. The Templar have long been Enorian only (though we JUST opened our ranks to Duiran, doh) , but the Illuminai were sort of the same as the Carnifex: You put the guild first and you're good. There may, in fact, be changes that happen to make it impossible for Duiran to fit in, otherwise we've got to sort of in game assume people just up and leave.

    I'm not sure how it will work out. It sounds like the Carnifex are about to take a big hit, and the same may be true for the Illuminai.
  • LeanaLeana Member Posts: 84 ✭✭✭
    Oleis said:


    Leana said:

    One major thing needs to happen for this to even be possible for most of the Carnifex: Bloodloch loses its mandatory undeath.

    As I understand it, players are taking in-character steps to make this happen already. 

    But will there be a push to open up guilds to newly displaced people?


  • AxiusAxius where I amMember Posts: 166 ✭✭✭
    edited January 1
    even as someone who is ultimately unaffected by this: I still see this as a complete Misstep. There has to be OTHER options that won't upheave two major guilds, and won't completely destroy the RP of a large number of characters, causing the players to either have to undergo a severe character change that might not even make any -sense- for their characters, or just up and leave the game in hopes of finding a more stable platform elsewhere. With MKO having gone down the drain, we're back to being one of the smallest (I'm not sure if Imperian is smaller, or bigger, but I'm estimating us to be around the same size), so something like this -isn't- going to help the game. It's going to hurt the game all in the name of "storytelling". Which while I appreciate the attempt. There's gotta be better ways. The rest is good, the last point is the issue for me.

    It also sounds like it's more for the benefits of Duiran than anyone else, who actually probably would be the one incident of a case of "conflict of interest" since their city leadership is based around the guilds. Which I'll indicate isn't really an ideal thing at all, if you're changing a major mechanic in order to fix a problem there.

    The squeaky wheel might get the oil, but dagnabbit, don't completely jam a stick into the spokes of every other cog on the machine just trying to oil the one squeaky wheel.

    Edit: As an additional note: I've heard that it was suggested that the Carnifex and the Illuminati were to be divested from cities. I think this would ultimately be a better option if you're going to enforce these changes, because the Carnifex, at least, was BUILT as a guild not tied to a city. They have an outside guildhall. The vision must compromise when it harms the playerbase more than it helps anything else. And weighing the benefits and the disadvantages, going ahead as planned without at -least- divulging the Carnifex and (possibly) the Illuminati from their cities is going to result in our small game losing players. And I guarantee you, a loss of players is bad, but I'm fairly certain a large number of those players are going to be people who have and would normally continue to invest -MONEY- into this game. And this is forcing those players away from the game.
    Post edited by Axius on
    PilarRunas
  • SerriceSerrice the Black Fox Member Posts: 1,202 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Imperian is by far smaller.
     
  • XeniaXenia Member Posts: 884 ✭✭✭✭✭
    One, Hapsy New Years! Two, as someone displaced and looking into things, I can see how this is going to ultimately positive. It's going to mean major changes for Xenia that will occur slowly over time, but all in all it's going to be good. We all discuss a desire for better conflict. In order to do this all the cities need to have a healthy influx of new players. By enforcing this, we're going to hopefully see this occur in the cities. Additionally, in my previous MUD experiences, the culture was based around the cities first and guilds second. There was no room for this to waver except for in one guild, a thieve's guild, which led to an interesting dichotomy in the game. When looking at what sort of group is fun, I think most agree anything that is < 5v5 is typically ideal, anything bigger is just a numbers game. I anticipate seeing more of this occurring in RP driven conflict if cities have larger, healthier populations and this change will probably result in this.

    I'm not sure how I'll fit into things, but I think with the change we're also going to see an expansion in what being your typical city devoted person looks like. In this, we're going to see a place carved for rogues who are where they are because they are dedicated to the city, even if they don't necessarily belong to a guild. Thinking on this, it makes me feel excited to explore this new facet to city culture.
    image
    EmelleFezzixPilar
  • ZhukovZhukov Member Posts: 8
    I like the idea of city noviceship as not all guilds have the playerbase to help new players when they are just starting out. I'm not sure I support forcing players to join the city of their guild but I do see why it was made. Until recently most of the Sciomancer leadership was always from Loch, made it harder to influence anything in Spines.
  • AishiaAishia Queen Bee Member Posts: 1,820 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Never really bothered enforcing city stuff in Shamans but seemed like organically everyone just felt like they belonged in Duiran, even Enorian people who joined always seemed to move quickly. I guess maybe what needs to happen for some people to fit more city wise is working on RP more for "x class but I'm actually an X" Probably some room for Syssin Death Knights and Illuminationy Shamans with a bit of perspective changing. Even a templar Sentinel could frame themselves as a WILDERNESS SCOUT or something. Not like you can't still be X in X city same tether.




    Pilar
  • SatomiSatomi Member Posts: 225 ✭✭✭
    I want to echo @Leana's question, about what will happen to the people who are logged out at the time this change hits the 4 week date. Will they be automatically shifted to their guild's city? Or when they log in, will they have a message stating that they have X time to pick a side before they're auto-shifted?

    I ask because if I find myself kicked out of the Fex because I, just for the sake of argument, spend a couple months in Europe backpacking around.. I'd probably be more than a little upset. I'd feel the same with Spines, though City Ranks are easy to get with effort. GR16 in the Fex was a process.

  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    Satomi said:
    I want to echo @Leana's question, about what will happen to the people who are logged out at the time this change hits the 4 week date. Will they be automatically shifted to their guild's city? Or when they log in, will they have a message stating that they have X time to pick a side before they're auto-shifted? I ask because if I find myself kicked out of the Fex because I, just for the sake of argument, spend a couple months in Europe backpacking around.. I'd probably be more than a little upset. I'd feel the same with Spines, though City Ranks are easy to get with effort. GR16 in the Fex was a process.
    They will be placed into a special room and held until they choose to either stick with city (and leave guild) or guild (and have the option to automatically join city). I didn't want to force one way or the other. 
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
    Satomi
  • VaskarVaskar Member Posts: 57 ✭✭✭
    Oleis said:

    The problem with the conflict of interest I'm talking about is that it results in a pre-emptive stifling of conflict. Leaders understand the implications on an OOC level and compromise their characters' roleplay to avoid starting issues that might resonate through their many allegiances. It's something that would make good storytelling if we were all forced to be totally true to our characters, but it results in a bland safety zone because we're (understandably) afraid to stir the pot. It's the same reason it was problematic to have cross-tether Orders: when you bring potential enemies together under a friendly umbrella, at least one of them has to abandon their ideals.

    I don't know that I'd say they compromise their roleplay, so much as that they intentionally guide their roleplay down paths that won't lead to that kind of conflict. They know that certain routes will put their guildmembers into uncomfortable situations and so they run their character in a way that just completely avoids those situations. It's the safest and least disruptive route, but it's also the most boring and restrictive one. It als puts limits on events that can be run, because org leaders will go out of their way to not just avoid certain conflict hooks, but to avoid any situations that could lead to those conflict hooks.

    This has always been the major problem with crossfaction orders and guilds. I know for sure that it was back in the early days of Imperian. It's hard to do a city-v-city conflict when a third of your fighters are in a guild with enemy fighters and another third of them are in orders with enemy fighters and so forth and it definitely can lead to situations where a certain conflict is basically unthinkable. Even if the leader really wants to pick that specific fight they can't do it because they're in a situation where half of their followers will tap out of the fight due to conflicted loyalties.

    As far as the Carnifex go, though... the last time I was active in this game I am pretty sure that something like 80%+ of the Carnifex guild were Spirean. I think there were maybe two active Bloodlochian members and one of them was me. If that's still the case it may just be better to give the guild the option of switching its flag to Spiresreach. Maybe do something with the undead Houses to replace the missing guild?
    AxiusFyrren
  • OleisOleis Producer Emeritus Member, Administrator, Immortal Posts: 1,393 admin
    Ilyon said:
    One major thing needs to happen for this to even be possible for most of the Carnifex: Bloodloch loses its mandatory undeath.
    As I understand it, players are taking in-character steps to make this happen already. 
    Gotta say, it's slightly surprising to see "city of undeath removes mandatory undead status" listed under the heading of strengthening org identities :tongue: Would have expected the gentle nudging to be the other way around!
    To be frank, part of what holds Bloodloch back is its lack of rallying point right now. Focusing on undeath as a state of being doesn't give citizens any kind of external motivation or real reason to fight, because making the rest of the world undead doesn't particularly benefit them. There's enough to Bloodloch's identity to pull out and emphasize in the place of something so blunt and simple. 
    You say to Slyphe, "You're so freaking smart."
    [---]
    "^," Slyphe agrees with you.
    LeanaPilarKodazaFyrren
  • IlyonIlyon Member Posts: 746 ✭✭✭
    I see. Yes, that is a valid point. Honestly I think it'd be better to get rid of undeath entirely, as it's so insignificant overall, and focus solely on living vs vampires - but that's likely outside the scope of this thread.

    OleisLeanaVolka
  • SatomiSatomi Member Posts: 225 ✭✭✭
    @Oleis Will the HELP for BLOODLOCH have a new name after all of this? So it says something aside from 'the City of the Undead'. If they start admitting living Carnifex/Indorani?

    It may be a bit pre-emptive to ask, but now I'm curious.

  • LinLin SMASHER/DEVOURER MASCHINEKLASTMember Posts: 1,560 mod
    Bloodloch's admitted non-undead several times in its past, it's not a big deal.
    ZailaRunasVolka
«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.