City and Guilds - Goals and Consequences

Xenia · January 2017

fuck it, because i'm fired up.

@Rhyot and Bloodlochians, you are complaining about people leaving, Then fucking join the guild, have BL people populate it. Just cus my RP has shaped into something that makes Xenia just as invested in Spinesreach as other places doesn't mean I want to see the guild fail and don't care. It's a kick in the teeth to make the choice that Xenia's going to be that person who went back on her sworn oaths, I'm accepting and playing out this character choice and it's fine. Why don't you and the rest of Bloodloch start doing the same and stop bitching about what we're going to do and instead get proactive about making the Carnifex a good option for those players who are STILL on the fence? I'm making my plan, and when they ask me what I'm doing I tell them, that sounds better than the prospect of an empty guild and they find themselves wanting to do that instead. That's not my fault, either. You guys need to get proactive. Displaced bloodborns still kicking around, idle top tier Bloodlochians should join up and give it a new face. You don't like the military RP, great change it! This is your chance! But seriously, stop complaining about what we're going to do as we attempt to move on.

If there are any Carnifex still complaining and upset about whatever 'work'/resources/etc. you put in get over it. Stop being selfish and be happy that as a player you might have contributed something to a faction of the game that's going to actually exist. Are you seriously going to complain about this? Come on, don't be petty.

Everyone else -- mind your own business and stop trying to meta-game us by putting people on tilt with all the opinions that lack insight, empathy and are generally insensitive. Don't you want what we do to be healthy and positive to the game?

Teani · January 2017

Personally, I want to say that I like the upcoming changes and I can see why they are reasonable on a larger scale. I do understand the frustration of players who are moer affected by the changes than others, but I'm also glad to see so many level heads taking it in stride and trying to make the most of the situation. Seeing as the ball was dropped long ago with the Carnifex, I am confident that Admin won't make the same mistake again, but help those who need it with the transition.

I'd like to point out to all other org-leaders out there that it's important to be open-minded in this situation. Make sure you have something set up for people who might have to work through their differences with your organization to be able to have fun in the game. Now is -not- the time to assert your powers or OOC dislike of individuals, since we don't want to lose players. That's not to say that you should have a blanket amnesty, just be open enough to allow people to make amends if they approach you.

Jensen · January 2017

To add to Toz and Xenia, I was in the auxiliary unit and it worked for me. It would have been more successful if I had more energy for Aet in general, but it was definitely a viable path for characters like Jensen.

Leana · January 2017

Is 'Unicorn' a new swear word, because I've got a niece who may be in for some trouble.

@Xenia I didn't mean to spark something that would paint you in a bad light. I brought that example because it did not connect with what I experienced within the Carnifex. It doesn't mean I disapproved of your roleplay or how things played out. You're not being a unicorn if you grow an attachment to something, even if you mistreat it via game mechanics as we can't control them(Like the cold unfeeling RP that's crushed by 'Cries out in pain as Mob bashes you'). I thought you did a great job and you represented your guild in a positive way. We can all agree that the Carnifex are getting a raw deal because the admin allowed them to grow close to Spinesreach despite not wanting that to be the case. All the potential the change promises is only a guess at the best possible outcome and an effort to strip away unnecessary internal conflict.

I keep bringing it up because I'm upset on both sides of the argument. Many people (not just the Carnifex but all the guilds, like Templars who have been joining Duiran) are being displaced and we may lose some of them which will lower our overall numbers, hurting us all. I post to clear out the confusion, get some answers from the admin, and get more people talking so they can clear it out for themselves.

Oleis · January 2017

'unicorns' is what the forum software's autofilter uses to replace common words of profanity. It's become a bit of a joke.

With all respect to the good discussion that's taken place, I would like to divert this conversation away from the Carnifex. We're going to make our own progress with leadership from the guild and Bloodloch, and they're going to decide among themselves what they'd like to do. As @Xenia reflected, anything else is either outsider opinions on a personal matter or conversations that are just as valid on other media than the forums. Of course, you are all still encouraged to ask questions and float proposals, but publicly arguing the validity of their concerns doesn't really have purpose at this point.

Aymah · January 2017

I want to start by saying that I'm surprised by what I've read in this thread. But not in a remotely pleasant way. I think this is the least empathy I've seen displayed by the Aetolian community thus far, and it's not pretty.

Many organizations in the game have survived, and some thrived, solely on the efforts of its players. Are the Carnifex doing their lore 'wrong'? I don't think so. Saying that they're doing their lore wrong, or that they've ignored it in favor of numbers, or other things that have been mentioned, is like saying organizations are supposed to always be the way their original lore dictates. You don't beat your hounds enough? You don't treat novices like crap enough? Goodness, no comment.

Sorry to break it to you, but organizations change. Whether it comes naturally or prompted by events ran in the game, change and evolution of an organization is an inevitable thing - the same for individual characters.

Needless to say, I'm not happy with this change, specially with the crazy amounts of crap I've had to deal with since being appointed GM of the Sentinels. I think many guilds and other orgs have suffered because there hasn't been a clear guidance. Right now I'm trying hard to wrap my head around this change and beating myself up thinking how I will suddenly revert a decision made in the Sentinels of allowing members to join Enorian (this only happened recently), specially since it came with the 'go for it' of a Dendara NPC that has been interacting with the guild in recent times.

I get the need for change, and how this can be good for the health of the game, but it seems it will be imposed mechanically and sort of overnight rather than at least constructing upon it with IC resources, gradually. I get it, you want changes, and fast, that will allow retention of new players and whatnot, but at what cost? What huge hole will you bore into quite a number of characters' RP to do this?

And what happens next? How will we deal with our black sheep once cities and guilds are tightly bound? Does this change mean that our kicking someone out of our guild warrants their immediate expulsion from the city as well? And/or the other way around? I had to deal with some pretty nasty situations that involved my nearly burning out as GM and postponing and damaging my personal RP, so will I be given tools to make this easier, or just more obstacles?

Oleis · January 2017

I can sympathize with many of your points, but I take issue with the suggestion that this is overnight. The purpose of this post was to give you weeks of advance notice before we implement the newbie changes, with weeks of grace period to follow. This wave of feedback and argument would happen whether I did it well in advance or the night before. I chose the long route explicitly to give you a chance to implement gradual changes. I am committing significant effort and time to support the leaders of our organizations in making the transition, both logistically and in terms of RP support. I am also taking advantage of the fact that organizations change and doing my best to hear from everyone involved, while also guiding them toward what might be a more effective global role -- IF it's fun for them to play.

I am trying to be as open-minded as possible through this process, with the acknowledgement that the core details of this plan are not changing. I have faith that that will be good enough.

Aymah · January 2017

What I mean with 'overnight' is that there doesn't appear to be any specific events or IC motives leading to this happening, it's more of a "you have x time to adjust to this." If this were approached gradually and with justifying events, I wouldn't have so much issue with it.

Am I, as guildmaster, supposed to wing it in coming up with some manner of RP that will make this all fit together for my guild? Luckily there is justifications and potential RP for me, and at large, there aren't that many members of the Sentinels affected by this, but what of other guilds who may not so easily come into such motives?

Oleis · January 2017

Aymah said:

And what happens next? How will we deal with our black sheep once cities and guilds are tightly bound? Does this change mean that our kicking someone out of our guild warrants their immediate expulsion from the city as well? And/or the other way around? I had to deal with some pretty nasty situations that involved my nearly burning out as GM and postponing and damaging my personal RP, so will I be given tools to make this easier, or just more obstacles?

What comes next is a more thoughtful approach to why we're excluding people, and more weight to that exclusion when it's merited. I've already worked with org leaders to reason their way through potentially-difficult incoming members, and both scenarios have resulted in really positive experiences, both OOC and IC. We're likely to see fewer instances of someone being forced out of an organization without reason, because the stakes are higher and there's more immediate scrutiny on irresponsible leadership. On the other hand, someone who well and truly earns their dismissal from an organization will have to justify their presence in their other orgs, just as they currently do. Removing someone from a guild does not compel the city to remove them, but it does raise questions as to their conduct. Similarly, removing someone from a city does not ruin their guild membership outright, but it gives an opportunity for guild and city to work together (in-character) to resolve differences and conflicts. We simply have to use it that way.

Runas · January 2017

What I truly feel is troubling is that I am seeing a bunch of characters changing their allegiances and adjusting IC RP without having any IC inclination that anything is even happening yet, it all seems extremely meta from my standpoint. I have legitimately overheard people say IC, "I sense great change on the horizon and need to find a new guild"

Where did they hear this?
Why do they feel this as a character?

Truly you all need to sit back and let things progress, this post and information given by @Oleis was so that you wouldn't be blindsided when change inevitably comes, it was the same sort of direction that was given to the Daru from an IC standpoint when their mergers were to happen, and unfortunately as leaders or role-models to younger players it can be used as an IC tool to help guide along the change and ease the process. Despite OOC reason that you might be pissed off because things are changing, it is no reason to sacrifice a characters integrity just because you are salty.

We're all adults, I think riding out the wave would be the mature thing to do instead of a floating down river of snap conclusions that may ultimately result in a SOON result, depending on logistics and planning. This was meant to be informative, not end all be all....c'mon guys, lets try and work with the admin instead of being stubborn

Arbre · January 2017

Here's one reason, @Runas.

Xenia said:
Ryot, me leaving the Carnifex at this time was the best way to ensure a peaceful IC outcome. As Toz said, any Commander who attempted to change the loyalties would have been viewed as a traitor and someone Xenia would have attempted to run off. This isn't Alathesia's fault and the last thing I want is to snuff out something over bitter feelings. However for me, it would have felt forced and less immersive if the change had come around and Xenia had just been like, 'Ok, I accept this'. Instead I chose to have her leave before it came to light in game.

There are many others, most of which are good, legitimate reasons.

Runas · January 2017

How did she know IC it was going to happen though, there was nothing brought forth stating there would be any change in the game...

So a character made an IC decision based on something they read on the forums, whilst I see her reasoning as a legitimate reason IC, there was no catalyst to serve to make that decision, its just poor roleplay thats all I am saying. @Arbre ...and honestly Xenia of all people has handled it better than a couple instances, like I get why she did what she did, so I dont want to come down on her, there are others who are doing it more poorly and are not present in this thread that I have encountered IC...

I suppose I should preface that so it doesn't seem like this is pick on @Xenia time

Arbre · January 2017

I was about to respond and then realized @Oleis is probably ready to smack this train of conversation down because it's a tangent (and a heated one at that) off of the original topic. So I'll bring out my mod colors and say we're not going to agree, so I think it's time for us to move on, @Runas.

Xenia · January 2017

@Runas you're only referencing things I said, and not even anything you could have heard directly because it was said once over GT. This is exactly the sort of meta-gaming I was taking about earlier. You're just looking to get a rise, why else would you tag me in your stuff (I don't actually care what your response is)?

Anyway, a few comments back I made a suggestion on just what people like you can go do. I suggest you read back for reference.

Satomi · January 2017

Edit: I got rid of my post because I just read that Oleis wants to turn the convo away from the Fex. I had posted something about 15 hours late because my webpage didn't update :P

The post was generally about how there is no blame for what's happening to anyone, things developed semi-organically in the best ways we were able to do it (this is likely for every guild, too), and that the changes will be good in the long run, in terms of lore.

You know, basically echoing what everyone's been saying for the past 3 pages. (There was also a bunch of Carnifex stuff in there, too, that was also rambly and feelgood)

(more edit) @Toz, that was the event where Roan had us gather a bunch of corpses/souls to make this super powerful undead monstrosity. I think it attacked Enorian, did a lot of damage, and the Spirit Pantheon basically said "Yeah, no good." and kidnapped Roan, threw him into the Abyss, and then we tried to get him back.. and failed. Obviously. Attacked the Abyss. (Moi lost her arm in that, iirc). Then you made Gruxmal! (Total tangent, had to add)

Oleis · January 2017

This tangent does highlight an important thing -- As I'm meeting with organizational leaders, we're assessing to what degree we need to roleplay the transition to help members make their choices with solid IC information and motivation. I suspect that Bloodloch's transition event will motivate both Bloodloch and Spinesreach, but we will certainly fill in the blanks as needed. Same with Enorian and Duiran. If you want to leave right now, I'm certainly not going to punish you or anything. A few of you have given very valid reasons for why you don't see a purpose in sticking around your conflicting org. But if you're on the fence and you're not sure what decision to make, you might find it worthwhile to wait for events to clarify and motivate.

Quellisonde · January 2017

Okay, according to what I can learn so far, Bloodloch admitting undead is not a given at this time.

History for me: I had Achaea char, they redid the class taking away the part I liked and making it a craft I'd have to invest credits in and leaving me with all the things I did not like on my class. I quit.

A five year investment in Midkemia Online, it was closed.

Now I have invested in 2 chars here with rollover creds and one in lusternia which I just don't like that one. So if you are going to once again pull the rug out from under me, I think you should refund every damn credit I have spent in rollover and let me pick anew. I'll lose all the hard work I put into it but at least I could start over with the changes you are putting in place and it be my choice of what I want to be with my character.

Thats how I feel about it, this not being able to depend on what I invest in, is getting old.

<<<Unhappy Camper

Oleis · January 2017

Quellisonde said:
Okay, according to what I can learn so far, Bloodloch admitting undead is not a given at this time.

If you're in a Bloodloch guild, you're going to get into Bloodloch. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement here, or you accidentally said "undead" when you meant "living", but my answer's the same either way.

Quellisonde · January 2017

No, you got it right, I am NOT an undead and after talking to my Commander a leader of Bloodloch, they are NOT saying they will accept undead, it is not assured that will be even though you are saying it is. Maybe you better get back in touch with the city leaders of Bloodloch and get your facts straight or someone elses. I was advised to wait it out and see what happens.

Axius · January 2017

I think the problem is that this whole thing is being done at half-mast. The godmin aren't actually taking the wheel. They're wanting us players to take the wheel and do what they want us to do, and then throw their hands into the mix only when we start to veer off course, which is making this entirely more bumpy. They either need to stop trying to force this entirely as a "all hands off" or they need to actually be -in- the game with the CL's to make this run smoother. Things like Bloodloch and whether or not they'll take non-undead citizens with this change is a big example of "We're leaving it to the player base to decide this." and this alone is going to entirely screw with everything. This is one point where there NEEDS to be someone who is on this project sitting with it and telling everyone how it's going to go down if they're going so far as to force changes like this guild restriction stuff. You can't just make one change in the entire machine and expect everything else to compensate on its own, that's how the machine breaks down until only the parts that CAN run with the changes are running.

edit: And if they're not wanting to babysit the meetings and make this decision go one way or another, they need to not be saying it's going to go one way when there's no confirmation it'll go that way as well.

Oleis · January 2017

Axius said:
I think the problem is that this whole thing is being done at half-mast. The godmin aren't actually taking the wheel. They're wanting us players to take the wheel and do what they want us to do, and then throw their hands into the mix only when we start to veer off course, which is making this entirely more bumpy. They either need to stop trying to force this entirely as a "all hands off" or they need to actually be -in- the game with the CL's to make this run smoother. Things like Bloodloch and whether or not they'll take non-undead citizens with this change is a big example of "We're leaving it to the player base to decide this." and this alone is going to entirely screw with everything. This is one point where there NEEDS to be someone who is on this project sitting with it and telling everyone how it's going to go down if they're going so far as to force changes like this guild restriction stuff. You can't just make one change in the entire machine and expect everything else to compensate on its own, that's how the machine breaks down until only the parts that CAN run with the changes are running.

edit: And if they're not wanting to babysit the meetings and make this decision go one way or another, they need to not be saying it's going to go one way when there's no confirmation it'll go that way as well.

What you're suggesting is exactly what's happening. There's a big difference between saying "wait and see what happens" (especially in-character) and "this hasn't been decided yet". Our meetings so far have been very intentional and very specific. I haven't met with the whole of Bloodloch yet, but I have explained my plans for Bloodloch to one or two leaders, and there's no confusion about what IS happening. The questions are mostly in the details, to cater to leader preference and adapt to recent roleplay in the org. That's true across the board. The leaders and I have agreed on the direction more often than not, but that's no indication that this is loosey-goosey. What's important to be, and what SHOULD be important to the people in this game who are worried about the roleplay implications, is taking the next month or so to have events scaled to the degree necessary to make the changes. A global event isn't going to seal the deal for all four cities. Having everyone clamor for information from the orgleaders, IC or OOC but especially IC, misses the point of how much effort we're putting into the transition process.

tl;dr: I welcome fair play and fair discussion, but you are not informed enough to make that assessment.

Quellisonde · January 2017

Well, my convos were IC and OOC in nature with the leader of Carni and I did leave with the distinct impression that neither the Guild or the City of Bloodloch are feeling the changes are set in stone.

So that could be an issue for you in this change, I don't mind going to Bloodloch but when I created my char I did not want to be undead and chose this guild and the city of Spinesreach because that is what I wanted of course. I am also being told I could change guilds and retain my carni class skills. That may be an option for me, looking into that.

You are in charge so consider this a headsup to you that there are some major wrinkles yet to be ironed out on the player base and leaders supporting the changes you desire, at least that's what I was feeling on the convos I had so far.

Don't get me wrong, I understand your desire to make changes to improve your game and they are not always pleasant for those that will be affected. On the one hand you have the Carnifex it will impact but then if you are forcing Bloodloch to change what they have always been that's also a big kettle of fish. What's more important city flavor rp or guild...I sure don't have an answer but it doesn't seem like a easy change or one that will go that smoothly overall at this juncture.

For me, I joined in Bloodloch and did the academy in Bloodloch and waited until after completion to leave the city and join Spines...so that in itself suggests a need to have it come under the Bloodloch city it belongs to. Especially with the new change to novicehood (very familiar with novicehood and leaders being in MKO for 5 years, I had served in every city and worked with the novices).

But the flip side, having the city change what it has always been rp wise undead and vampirish, certainly must be meeting resistance as well. It does not seem there will be easy answers to all this.

Glad I am not in your shoes...:)

Satomi · January 2017

It's also important to note that it's only been like.. a week? To my understanding, efforts are being made to make these changes sync up with the IC and Roleplay of each city and guild. There is roughly a month's time frame for these to become hard set. That makes 3 weeks-worth of roleplay for the anti-living sentiments to slowly be discarded in as organic a fashion as possible for Bloodloch.

After all, it only took Satomi 60 or so years before she even acknowledged that Living people could even be on par with Undead (gj @Xenia)

Leana · January 2017

Satomi said:
It's also important to note that it's only been like.. a week? To my understanding, efforts are being made to make these changes sync up with the IC and Roleplay of each city and guild. There is roughly a month's time frame for these to become hard set. That makes 3 weeks-worth of roleplay for the anti-living sentiments to slowly be discarded in as organic a fashion as possible for Bloodloch.

After all, it only took Satomi 60 or so years before she even acknowledged that Living people could even be on par with Undead (gj @Xenia)

You're right, this is all really early stuff. The month hard set time only kicks in when the change is made in game. These posts and them telling us is all early warning to get ourselves setup for the change.

I also hate the changes, but might as well look into possibilities and motivations and let things take their time. In two months, Bloodloch may get rid of their Undead only policy.

@Quellisonde You can 100% keep your carnifex class and quit the guild if down the line you -can not- join Bloodloch. I want to stress -Down the line- as you should give the whole world time to catch up to the OOC direction it's going. With your Carnifex skills and being apart of Spinesreach, you still have the option of joining the Syssin, Sciomancers, Cabalists, OR no guild at all. You can likewise stay in the guild but quit the city, something I wouldn't suggest but is still an option.

@Oleis I think a nice way to help this transition of Bloodloch being okay with living is to alter Abhorash's edicts to say, 'Everything is our prey' instead of 'Living are our prey'. Vampires feed on anything with blood, not just the living. Focused more on dominating all sentience with strength seems more a vampire theme. Make them more 'Better than everyone, even weaker versions of their race' would put another coffin nail in the wasted effort that is 'undead vs living'. Or like, 'The stronger the individual, living or undead, the stronger their blood.' Bam.

Quellisonde · January 2017

I've been mulling this over while I hunted, I think when hunting.

I have an idea, why not make a new type of being persona to make this work. A category of Servants of the Dark in Bloodloch. or whatever more brilliant name for it you can come up with....but in essence they could be subservient to undead and vampires and be kept from holding office etc.

However, I don't advise the keeping them out of office, Bloodloch from what I have seen could really benefit from more active city members who would serve the city and the Carnifex has many such people that would really boost it.

But this is an idea that would keep the rp flavor of the city but also leave the Carni with an option for not being a vampire or undead but aligned with the right rp of the city.

Satomi · January 2017

@Quellisonde Bloodloch is possibly losing it's 'City of the Undead' status.. besides, in a lot of video games that have Undead, the Necromancer is still a living being (though sometimes patchworked to pit if not full blown Lich status).

Living can be just as dark as Undead and Vamps. Necromancers start living, and sometimes stay living. Carnifex, which is the Soul-version of a Necromancer, follows the same general concept IMO. There is also a ton of RP you can engage in to justify associating yourself with Undead over other living cities.

My point is that there doesn't really need to be allowances made. Just give 'em full rights from the get-go. (my opinion, anyway

) Vampires will always consider themselves better than everyone else, but Living individuals can serve a purpose, and can perform on equal terms. Just don't expect a ton of herb shops to open up in Bloodloch anytime soon

This is the time to feel out any adjustments and take in the changes. If you do feel you are getting treated unfairly.. I remember reading something @Oleis wrote about how it is always best to compile reports and dated documentation on the incidents. If they persist, and you legitimately attempt to resolve or meet the situation part-way, I'm sure something can be done. While I can't guarantee living will be in Bloodloch by next week, or even next month, if you find yourself denied entry with no valid reason (after you're forced to join or not), then I am relatively confident that you have every right to open the pit and bring the whole situation to Golgotha... I mean Oleis.

Quellisonde · January 2017

I think you missed the whole point Satomi...it is Bloodloch who does not allow undead SO if they create something new like minions or what have you, would be a good opportunity for creativity and adding some new flavor to the whole thing, perhaps Lady Isoyne would have a good idea it would not make them change to accept undead per se but add a new type of category that would fit in and make it all work more nicely rp wise. This idea was not for myself but more for the city to be able to bend but stay in character with what they have always been.

Satomi · January 2017

That used to be how things were. Living were essentially second-class citizens, generally in the thrall of some Vampire or other. So I'm told, at least. I was young when I started poking at Aetolia and I only have vague impressions left.

Besides, more knowledgeable people on the subject (particularly Bloodloch citizens and people in charge) can argue the Pro-Undeath thing Bloodloch has been promoting and how effective a roleplay/conflict point it is. Personally, I eventually got tired of dealing with all the Living complaining I experienced when I tried to preach the glory and beauty of Undeath to my fellow Carnifex (all of which decided to stay living and live in Spinesreach, for the most part). It's fun to be a preacher, of sorts, at times but it tended to get a lot of people ganging up on me about why the Living aren't such weak, inefficient meatsacks whose sole purpose was to fatten up and feed the Blooded. To put it delicately. (HELP UNDEADSTATS gave me a lot of arguing points) Valid things for them to do, because of my actions, but eventually you lose hope that people will see reason.

I do understand what you mean, though. I was just offering my own opinions on the matter, since all we can do is speculate until the administration gives us a more concrete idea of what to expect with the Bloodloch/Living dynamic.

Also, I want to note that I know you're referencing living, but the text I see says 'undead'. I only know you're talking about Living because Bloodloch -only- accepts undead and Azudim. (at least, up until this point)

With this post, I'm hitting the bed. :P

Quellisonde · January 2017

lol yeah I did get that a bit wonky they ONLY allow undead should have been the point and yes, maybe there is some old history and rp that was once that can be dusted off and revitalized, I surely am not UP on all the history and lore here, was just thinking it may be a creativity opportunity for something unique that adds value.

Eydis · January 2017

I'm excited to see some sort of change being made to spur conflict and ...just roleplay/activity in general. IMO Aetolia has needed a polarizing systemic change to keep conflict from continuously breaking down. I'm still wrapping my mind around the domino effect it will undoubtedly have, but upon first glance I think it will have a positive effect on Aetolia as a whole.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

City and Guilds - Goals and Consequences

Comments