Class dispensing

Valingar

Irruel said:

Perhaps factions will allow that kind of corrupted version of a class to exist? The occasional rogue doesn't hurt the game, if played well. Being a corrupted templar in spinesreach isn't going to break the game - and not being able to multiclass any of your new side's classes is a fair negative.

A corrupt Templar would break the game soon, actually, since retribution is being changed to allow only one person to use the affs. You could immunize your entire team! I'm sure other, similar abuses exist too.

Arbre

Would someone give me a short overview on factions?  Either I never read it, or I've forgotten it, because people keep mentioning it and I have no idea what they're speaking of.

Areka

They're essentially NPC organizations that you do quests/deeds for and obtain faction rank. It's what new Lycans are going to be through, and each faction rank opens up different privs or rewards within that group. Some factions will be opposed so favour with one will be enmity with another. Ideally each guild/city will be associated with some and need to maintain favour with them, though also provide opportunities for the polarity to go back and forth with other avenues of aggression. 

Edit: http://forums.aetolia.com/discussion/429/factions-npcs-on-the-rise

Calipso

In Achaea, when classes had become accessible upon whichever one the player wanted, some slight restrictions were applied to restrict Alignment focused classes.

For example, Priests and Templars/Paladins, having shared the same skill of Devotion (as ours once did) were subjected to a certain "Good RP". If a Priest or Paladin was seen as assisting the forces of Darkness, Evil, or Chaos in any fashion, or were attempting to harm the forces in Good, they were Excommunicated, having their powers of Devotion stripped. Now note, their skill still existed, transed and all, but they were unable to regenration 'devotion points' in order to utilize most of the skills therein. This was generally a great way of how 'Good RP' was enforced. Of course, there was also some strict rules about excommunicating players, since there had to be very good reason to do so, so to make sure it wasnt being abused.

The same thing applied to Necromancers. They could be 'cut off' from their Life Essence by the leaders of Evil. Even the forces of Nature had the ability to enemy one to the forest, if they saw them as harming nature.

Generally this could be a good idea to take up if there is fear of certain classes being used in an incorrect-to RP way (such as a Daru assisting vampires).

Draiman

What no. Duiran use to have that power on steroids, and I'd much rather it be kept to flavor skills rather than effect PK so largely. I would rather keep shit the way it is than let a players RP control my mechanical ability to PK.

Katszia

So the thing is, guilds are an RP tool in my opinion. They have standards, goals, beliefs, etc. They are an engaging tool for having things to do like advancing (which sometimes is more tedious than it is fun), and leadership for those who care to try for it (but again even that's more a popularity contest that's in the hands of other players than anything else). The organization itself should be more akin to divine orders and cities, than a Nazi organization that decides who can and can't utilize the skills of the class.

Skills are mechanics. They allow for a specific form of bashing, or PK. I don't think guilds and skills are mutually exclusive in all cases when it all comes right down to it. Yes, I also agree that skills are an RP tool, which is precisely why I disagree with people being barred from classes they'd like to use. I get that not everyone has viable reasons for wanting a class beyond, "Ohaider OP class I want you for PK", but I think there are a bigger majority of people who'd like classes that fit with RP for their character, or their character's personality.

I was in Achaea when they changed guilds to houses as well, and I think the reason behind it was sound. Houses stand for something (as mentioned above for how guilds should be). You have some that are scholarly, others that are based on physical strength and combat, and everything in between. The point of the house isn't about the skills, but about a pull toward the RP that works best for your character. But even before houses in Achaea, they at least had several guilds with the same skills (4 monk guilds, 4 serpent guilds, etc), so if the guild leadership didn't like someone, that person at least had a fighting chance to just join a different guild in a different city, and have the skills they liked and spend money on (whether IG or OOC) to use.

The biggest problem with "neutral" classes right now is that Aetolia doesn't have a large enough player base to justify having a monk and syssin guild on both sides of the coin. The other problem is not just putting a spirit/shadow stamp on them, what with the Sentaari being based in Duiran/Enorian (blurred lines there) and the Syssin being based in Spinesreach. No matter what way you swing it, someone's going to go "I'm not giving you class, you're dark!" or "I'm not giving you class, you're Light!" Or hell, "I've never met you before, and you're not an enemy of my guild or the affiliated city, or the Patron/Matron, but I don't want you having my class so there!"

I can see the argument on both sides of the coin, but really... if someone isn't enemied to anything, and the class is neutral or on the same side your character is in, there's no reason to say no. If the implemented mechanics won't allow for the crossing of classes that's a different story entirely. It makes -sense- that someone can't be a Vampire and a Lumifairy. But monk, syssin, carebear and lyc? Eh... I've never liked players holding that much power over other players, because I feel like people forget this is still a game, and skills are a HUGE part of enjoyment. If I hate the skills of the guild I want to be in, but love the guild itself, I'm screwed just because someone else says "nope" to apprenticing with the skills I'd really enjoy.

That said, it really does suck being outright denied for no apparent reason for a class that viably works for your character RP wise, especially when you -try- to do things the right way and not just join, get to GR3, and quit like a dick because you got class. But no good deed goes unpunished!

Daskalos

Mechanics are RP. There is no divide. There is no difference in me emoting 'lips turn up in a slight grin' and pushing GRIN. When my angel rips your soul from your body, she does so in a very violent manner. Every time. 

Achaea said 'ok, some skills should be on every side' and they created the 4 monks and 4 syssin guilds. They didn't create 4 priests (though the Apostates were very similar, they were the anti-priest). Aetolia doesn't want duplicate skills, so instead, they went with 2 neutral skillsets while the guilds remained loyal. I am very opposed to handing out skills based on tether, because I'm sure the Shamans don't want Haven having their skills with his history. Daskalos doesn't want Calipso having Luminary with her history with the guild. If you created a second monk\syssin guild on each side, and let them dispense, then fine (even though I doubt it happens). But stop the madness that is people thinking that it's OK for Devotion or Spirituality to work with Loch. If you go Undead, those skills quit working, so ROLEPLAY wise (this is an RP game, right?) the skills shouldn't work in support of their antithesis.

Katszia

Katszia said:

I can see the argument on both sides of the coin, but really... if someone isn't enemied to anything, and the class is neutral or on the same side your character is in, there's no reason to say no. If the implemented mechanics won't allow for the crossing of classes that's a different story entirely. It makes -sense- that someone can't be a Vampire and a Lumifairy.

History is its own beast. I'm not arguing against that, and from what I've read, most of the people who have shared similar thoughts as I just did agree that if there's history, enemy status, whatever... that's a different story.

Haven

@Daskalos: In your example, what do the Shaman lose by Haven obtaining their class? What do the Luminaries lose by Calipso having class? This is not to say these guilds give the class but I somehow got the skills. What have they lost?

Areka

The sacred training of their organizations that was granted to them to help them in their idealized work is being obtained and utilized outside of their purview and by individuals who are violently against the things they value and stand for and there is no meaningful recourse they can take, since both individuals have shown that they do not care about the consequences of their actions, death, or in the latter case, partaking in any meaningful interaction within the matter. There is nothing they can do to make an impact, since enemy statuses, loss of interaction, etc, have no value or meaning on the other side of the equation. 

Veovis

People are talking about the lycan revamp like it's the first experiment guildless class, but we've had vampires since the game opened. We already have a pretty good idea how it will go, unless I'm missing something.

Daskalos

We lose our ability to roleplay as protectors of Light\the Wilds. How can you say that you have a Holy Purpose, or that the wilds respond to your command because you are in tune with them when the man who burns them can wield them the exact same way? 

The only way I would be OK with classes handing out via mob is if excommunication came with it. I have a serious problem with an Angel fighting with Loch via a loophole. Rarely is a grudge held in this game forever. No offense my man, because you know I like you, but it seems like there's a class you want but can't get because of your roleplayed choices, and rather than work to change who you are IC'ly, you want the administration to force the guild to share it's toys.

We pride ourselves on being an RP-first game. Why aren't we doing that? I wish we had a light-side Syssin and a dark-side monk. Not that I want to fight against Monks, but because I don't like Syssin  skills in Enorian because of their ties to artifice. The skills -aren't- really neutral, if you read the messages. It's a damned gray area that is kind of glossed over because we let our people play as they want to and a lot of people have the class. Heck, I have it due to my collect 'em all mentality. 

I remember the very real anger felt when Illpalazzo and Sigfried were running around with Luminary teaming with vampires. And it's an un-even playing field, because there is no way we'd ever let Vampires land in Enorian. 

Xavin

Haven said:

@Daskalos: In your example, what do the Shaman lose by Haven obtaining their class? What do the Luminaries lose by Calipso having class? This is not to say these guilds give the class but I somehow got the skills. What have they lost?

Well, the shamans risk someone who has shown they want nothing more than to see the spirits the shamans serve/worship utterly destroyed.gaining better access to those spirits to accomplish that goal. They also risk ticking Duiran off for teaching Haven abilities that he would likely use to bring harm to the oak.

Aarbrok

If I recall correctly Veovis wanted monk, and traditionally you just need to pay Dato 100 cr for that one.

Haven

Areka said:

The sacred training of their organizations that was granted to them to help them in their idealized work is being obtained and utilized outside of their purview and by individuals who are violently against the things they value and stand for and there is no meaningful recourse they can take, since both individuals have shown that they do not care about the consequences of their actions, death, or in the latter case, partaking in any meaningful interaction within the matter. There is nothing they can do to make an impact, since enemy statuses, loss of interaction, etc, have no value or meaning on the other side of the equation. 

So the issue is that guilds don't have enough of an impact against someone with the class using it outside of what they want? If that's the case, how is that any different currently than if a Templar suddenly leaves the guild with class and just starts doing things that are anti-Templar? That's not a class issue at all. That's a roleplay issue. If I understand you correctly, you're not complaining so much that they have the class...but more that you cannot make the character in question change. Well, that's not a right you have. That right belongs to the player in how they want to go about their role and how they want their char to develop based on the actions around them if at all. The guild still has not lost anything by the person simply having the class. If the person does unTemplar things or unShaman things or unLuminary things while utilizing the skills, the guild CAN if they wanted, still interact with the person and "punish" them for it. Via PK or other sanctions. Pull weight in the cities to see them closed off there as well. Put pressure on their current guild make them stop. Whatever. The RP avenues exist if you so choose to pursue them. Them having class stops you from doing nothing.

Daskalos said:

We lose our ability to roleplay as protectors of Light\the Wilds. How can you say that you have a Holy Purpose, or that the wilds respond to your command because you are in tune with them when the man who burns them can wield them the exact same way? 

The only way I would be OK with classes handing out via mob is if excommunication came with it. I have a serious problem with an Angel fighting with Loch via a loophole. Rarely is a grudge held in this game forever. No offense my man, because you know I like you, but it seems like there's a class you want but can't get because of your roleplayed choices, and rather than work to change who you are IC'ly, you want the administration to force the guild to share it's toys.

We pride ourselves on being an RP-first game. Why aren't we doing that? I wish we had a light-side Syssin and a dark-side monk. Not that I want to fight against Monks, but because I don't like Syssin  skills in Enorian because of their ties to artifice. The skills -aren't- really neutral, if you read the messages. It's a damned gray area that is kind of glossed over because we let our people play as they want to and a lot of people have the class. Heck, I have it due to my collect 'em all mentality. 

I remember the very real anger felt when Illpalazzo and Sigfried were running around with Luminary teaming with vampires. And it's an un-even playing field, because there is no way we'd ever let Vampires land in Enorian. 

Again, your ability to do just that remains. By them having the class, nothing has really changed for you. If anything, opportunity and roleplay is opened to you to interact with someone outside your guild. I'm not advocating for Luminary+Vampire combos. There are clear tethers in place to prevent that sort of thing and if such a loophole were to occur, I'm sure the admin would have no qualms stepping in to do something about it as they've done so in the past. (Sigfried lost his angel among other things iirc. I remember when the Ascendril had a necromancer? Or maybe undead in their guild? Something bad. And Damariel came in and nuked their ability to channel spirit as a whole cause of the corruption it caused. That line of RP got rectified real quick.)

Xavin said:

Haven said:

@Daskalos: In your example, what do the Shaman lose by Haven obtaining their class? What do the Luminaries lose by Calipso having class? This is not to say these guilds give the class but I somehow got the skills. What have they lost?

Well, the shamans risk someone who has shown they want nothing more than to see the spirits the shamans serve/worship utterly destroyed.gaining better access to those spirits to accomplish that goal. They also risk ticking Duiran off for teaching Haven abilities that he would likely use to bring harm to the oak.

We're talking about if I got the class by some other means that wasn't the guild. So I doubt Duiran would get ricked off at anything as the guild wasn't involved in my process of getting the skills in the first place in this scenario. Mechanically? It would be impossible for me to destroy unless Admin specifically backed me up. However, roleplay/story wise, yes, Haven would have better access to the spirits but that does not mean the guild can do nothing about it. They can and probably would, come and try to stop me from attaining such goals. If I RP mutilating the spirits or something somewhere, Shamans can easily come over and kill me or RP at me to try and stop it. Again, the Shamans have lost nothing. And even if they could not get to me for whatever reason, this is no different than if I found a way into Dendara and RP'd the same thing there. Nothing is actually lost! If anything, opportunity is gained for interaction.

Hell, you could even literally ignore me in either case and nothing would change! Where is this harm you all keep alluding to?

Oleis

There's a funny thing about rules and mechanics. I saw it on Imperian, as a player and an admin, and we're certainly seeing it here.

Not a single rule goes unhated. There's always going to be a subset of the playerbase that rails against a rule or a community standard because they fall on the wrong side of its consequences. There's always going to be a small group that gets off on denying those beleaguered few whatever privilege of which they are the keeper. And the rest of the players mostly shrug, probably giving brief nods to the points and opinions at play but not really caring because it hasn't affected them recently.

You guys are doing a wonderful job of spinning your wheels and arguing the hypotheticals of this situation. You even heckled Lin into re-opening a well-closed thread. But I still have to wonder what the point is. Those few of you who are peeved by the current system will feel vindicated and proud of your efforts at improving Aetolia. The few with privilege will either find new things to lord over others or be furious at us for making "unnecessary" changes. And the rest of the playerbase will keep on shrugging until some of them fracture into new rage/smug groups based on whatever new rules we've implemented.

These current rules have weak points for the same reason that new rules will have weak points: some players are jerks. If your preferred solution to that problem is to remove player interaction from the necessary parts of playing Aetolia, then so be it.

Calipso

Aarbrok said:

If I recall correctly Veovis wanted monk, and traditionally you just need to pay Dato 100 cr for that one.

With the nature of how one must gain Monk or Syssin, I think we could all have alittle respect for the privacy of these individuals and not 'out' names on a public forum. Thank you.

Haven

Oleis said:

There's a funny thing about rules and mechanics. I saw it on Imperian, as a player and an admin, and we're certainly seeing it here.

Not a single rule goes unhated. There's always going to be a subset of the playerbase that rails against a rule or a community standard because they fall on the wrong side of its consequences. There's always going to be a small group that gets off on denying those beleaguered few whatever privilege of which they are the keeper. And the rest of the players mostly shrug, probably giving brief nods to the points and opinions at play but not really caring because it hasn't affected them recently.

You guys are doing a wonderful job of spinning your wheels and arguing the hypotheticals of this situation. You even heckled Lin into re-opening a well-closed thread. But I still have to wonder what the point is. Those few of you who are peeved by the current system will feel vindicated and proud of your efforts at improving Aetolia. The few with privilege will either find new things to lord over others or be furious at us for making "unnecessary" changes. And the rest of the playerbase will keep on shrugging until some of them fracture into new rage/smug groups based on whatever new rules we've implemented.

These current rules have weak points for the same reason that new rules will have weak points: some players are jerks. If your preferred solution to that problem is to remove player interaction from the necessary parts of playing Aetolia, then so be it.

The point of the discussion became two-fold after the initial complaint:

1. To inform/Alert others of the perceived problem and explain why it's a problem where necessary.
   
2. Offer possible solutions and ways to get around said problem.
   

If anything, the contents of this thread are then merely things for the Admin to consider before they decide on the issue themselves whether or not they're going to do something about it if anything. We're often encouraged to voice our opinions if there are perceived problems or if there are ideas we'd like to see within the game and that's what we're doing.

However, not everyone believes there is a problem or agrees on the solutions proposed among other things. So between the nonbelievers and believers, there is an argument to sway one side to the other and that's where we're at currently. Though it doesn't look like either side is going to budge despite the evidence brought forward so I guess we can just ignore each other and instead focus on other things. (Like which solutions would be most beneficial and actually work.)

Daskalos

Did they not decide on the issue when they chose to put in the system in this method?

Did they not decide on the issue when they have stood their ground each time this thread crops up (by my estimation, about every 6 months or so?).

I'm all for freely giving out class. I don't believe you should make someone jump through hoops...

...unless through the RP -choices- that the person requesting the class has made in the past lies contrary to what the guild who holds the class stand for.

You want Luminary and not enemied to Eno\Guild? Talk to me. It's yours. Managed to get enemied to either? Not going to happen.

You say neither side is going to sway despite the evidence brought forward, but all you've brought is 'it's available and I should be able to have it'. You ignored the fact that class dispensing has always been in the hands of players. I wish they had made Syssin one tether and Sentaari the other, but we had a -ton- of Lochian monks, so it sort of had to, as well as a few Duiran Syssin.  

If anything, make a reskinned monk and syssin guild and put it on the other sides. Then the 'neutral' classes everyone can get to. The rest should all be handled through RP.

Carivah

But as Oleis's pointing out, none of the problems we have are inherent in the system, they're the result of player abuse, and there isn't going to be a solution that isn't open to the same type of player abuse happening in some other way.

All the evidence for or against some position or another is all either hypothetical, anecdotal, or personally subjective. So we're still all saying the exact same things on page 6 we did on page 1.

Oleis

Carivah said:

 So we're still all saying the exact same things on page 6 we did on page 1.