PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Garile on December 31, 2006, 12:41:53 pm
-
At the moment the guildsystem starts with 20k trie and four people you need to convince to join. However it doesn't require anything else. This is leading to a lot of guilds with questionable names and often without a IC role or even worse one against the setting completely.
Becuase of these guilds that in my opinion don't really add anything lasting I think it would be a much better idea that, instead of the system we have now, one "petitions" for the creation of a guild. A petition where you are required to tell why you are creating the guild and what it would add to the world and tell it's history and goals.
I don't feel the screening should be to hard specially on the part of what they feel it would add to the world, but atleast it would prevent many violation of the settings at the gate and perhaps one could even decide to stop the 999th knights of the something.
I also feel the most serious guildleaders would apreciate the help to make their guild a true part of Yliakum.
-
Although I recall discission on this before, 11 pages into asearch of just the wishlist area didn't turn it up so this stays. :)
Question, how do explain asking a body that is completely ooc to the world, while you're IC, if you can make a guild?
The only way I can see that working is if you start saying that the GMs are like an IC governing body, and your character is givng them a petition to start a guild. And then they as a governing body, look it over an either approve of it, or thrown in in the gutter for wasting thier time. This could work, say for trade type guilds. But it wouldn't work so well say for guilds of a secretive nature. And this would then start greying that line that says GMs are OOC.
With the GM team as it is, with the work load they have, guild petitions could be in queye for quite some time as well.
My searching did bring up a few results that I reread. Good ideas, that while not directly related to this idea, the concept is the same, and thus should be read before posting here.
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=14212.0 (the thread that lead to the guild requirements that currently exist in game)
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=21603.0 (another thread about guild fees and other ideas)
http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=18832.0 (concerning guild inviting)
-
Well I read the first two already, but seriously do you want to restart threads more then a year old?
Question, how do explain asking a body that is completely ooc to the world, while you're IC, if you can make a guild?
First of the question is what does having a guild at this moment add? At the moment this is only OOC guildchat and an OOC banner under ones name. Roleplaywise you can still play a guild without the mechanics of the game.
Second of IC you wouldn't be asking so why would this be an issue IC? If the guild is rejected becuase it is outside the setting the reason it wont be created is just that. You roleplayed your character having ideas it shouldn't have had. The time it takes to get aproved could be seen as the time it takes for the people in general to accept you as one group.
Third I agree if this would be implemented it would be best to have a new position, but personally I don't see it taking more then one person if you really ask for a minimum quality when you want to create a guild. How many guilds have you seen created lately with a good quality story and background and IC reasoning? If you have one person being able to read and judge two of those petitions per day on average I doubt you'll have a quee that would make people feel ignored.
The return you get however would be a gradual dissapearing of guilds that aren't IC and disrupt the RP feeling and the increase of IC oriented guild becuase the ones creating guilds will atleast be forced to think about their RProle when petitioning.
-
I only read the this being ooc part sooo...
I don't see how clicking a totally ooc button and throwing 20k trias to the wind is ic. Where does the tria go? Why did we give it? Who did we give it to? Who approved the guild? If us, why the hell did we just throw out 20k trias? Etc, etc. Not putting down the current system, but I'm sure that the dev team is going to find a great IC way to do it as time passes.
-
The only thing I can think is how would you feel if someone decided your guild was unworthy and was disbanded? I personally, as leader of a guild, would be devestated and would no longer bother with the game. I think many other players would react in a similar manner. It is my guild that keeps me logging into the game.
-
Obviously this would, as the title pretty much suggests, apply to the creation of new guilds. It would happen before a guild was created. It wouldn't be an evaluation afterwards so you wouldn't have guilds being disbanded, just not being created in the first place.
Becuase it is so hard to change a guild already there and becuase those changes are so obviously OOC and is then hard to ignore IC, it is in my opinion a lot easier to make sure such changes aren't nececary for obvious reasons by having them being checked before hand.
-
But then you are talking about a world wipe because you cannot fairly penalize new guilds when there are old ones they can point to and say "but that guild". It is just asking for trouble.
-
So you want to penalize the existing guilds? The ones that have already proven they work and already had an inpact in the world in RPs? How would you roleplay the sudden disbanding of all that use the guildsystem?
I would limit it to new guilds as a must and stongly hint the existing guild to do the same. Perhaps later when you are doing a wipe anyhow you could then do the old guilds. It wouldn't be fair to not give the old guilds atleast time and if work is the trouble you can imagine if all guilds now existing would all come at once. That would really be unpractical I think.
You might call it unfair but the people who created the old guilds did so fully complying I asume with the rules there at that moment. Also I don't see it as penalizing the new guilds. I see it as asking them for the things a guild in a game focussed on RP should have. How often have there been disputes about names being changed? The reason they are so heated is becuase that is done when the guild is already up and running. That for example "hell" is a word from RL suddenly doesn't mean that much to the members of that guild, becuase lets be honest most of the members probably decided to join on the name in the first place.
I feel it is a much better idea to move those discusions to before the guilds are created.
-
But a world wipe is a given. Are you saying that the guilds should survive any general chatracter wipe? What happened the last time, it was before the current guild system right?
I am not saying we should rush into a wipe just for this but there are some other things that would benefit from a general wipe and an eventual wipe is planned at some stage. All I am saying, I guess, is that the status quo is fine for now and let us get all our ducks in row fro when the inevitable comes.
As far as punishing the current guilds go I see it as enforcing the rules consistantly, in stead of having a hodge-podge of exceptions. Allowing exceptions is where grey areas turn black, if you will. Besides, how will you role-play a world wipe? You don't, you start fresh with all new stories. Why should some user contrived group span disparate world epochs? If all the characters are different would it not be likely that they would form different associations? How is it valid role play to recreate the same character when all else changes? As far as I am concerned, when the wipe comes all character names and guild names should be locked. Otherwise it is open season on identity theft. I could steal the Shalmaneser name from Zanzibar if I just registered it first. I don't know why I personally would want to steal his or another characters name but I can conceive that others might. If you are upset that all the out of game work involved with your guild would be lost, it would not be required. Your new guild could have a "historical" connection. In other words your new guild could be based upon "discovered manuscripts" that relate information about the lost guild's history.
It just seems to me that a world wipe is a perfect opportunity for a new age of the realm whenever it may come.
-
Guilds in this place we call reality don't get judged for acceptance by rulers or gods. Various terrorist orginazations and cults of the modern era don't go to the UN and ask if their name or goal is reasonable...
if people are willing to follow one person, so be it. After all, whats in a name? An identity is not made by a name, or quoted causes in life, but rather by actions... Heres a bit of an example... as a dwarf I was standing around in yliakum, some other dwarves from the way of the hammer were at harnquists, I was there too. Some elf (forget the race now) dropped in on the hammer guild members and started picking on them... Well, I noticed a menki bearing the guild tag of the outlaws dropped in, he listened in on the arguing and decided to help the hammers whom were innocent in the situation, well he made work of the elf, though not quick... But that isn't the point! ;D
Rather, the point I wish to make is that the outlaw helped the dwarves who were in trouble, and generaly the name "the outlaws" makes you believe they're evil bullies... But this situation proves other wise. As long as a guild name isn't vulgar I don't mind seeing odd guilds...
The only thing I would perhaps like to see is instead of a minimum of 5 members, the count should be raised slightly so there are less small guilds out there.
Sorry if I brought out points already spoken of.
-EL
-
Bah if that guy was worthy of the name outlaw he should have extorted the dwarves after dispatching the bully (which was probably just for fun).
-
That may be true bilbous... but keep in mind, its just an example, though I do get what you mean.
-EL
-
Sorry, I was itching to make an off-topic post for a couple hours now in various threads and finally scratched the least offensive way I could. As far as your comment about guilds being judged, they usually get around to incorporating and subject themselves to government oversight, unless you you start talking about criminal gangs and such which often get their names from the media. It doesn't matter much if you call yourselves the Imperial Ocelots if the media dubs you the "purple pussycats" and makes it stick.
-
*smiles*
The purple pussycats hehe
Anyhow to return ontopic ;)
@bilbous
You are talking about an world wipe, but are acting as if that would be an RPwipe aswell. Now I have had several wipes already and am suprised at that suggestion becuase this really never happened. Guilds like the Dark Empire and the Dragon Council simply recreate themselves and most people will simply recreate their main character aswell. With starting stats then obviously, but they don't roleplay a sudden loss of abilities either. So why would next wipe be different?
As for stealing names. GMs I believe are able to check what account you have. I remember being viceleader of a guild and have a GM check if the leader who came online was really the leaders account before handing over the recreated guild.
Anyhow I am not saying when a worldwipe would come we shouldn't implement it for the old guilds aswell. I am saying it would simply not be practical to not do it for the new guilds first and then when the worldwipe comes make it go for all guilds. This way when the worldwipe comes you have already checked all those new guilds and only need to check if they changed anything and only need to review the old guilds that are still arround. And if the system has been in place for more then two months before the worldwipe I doubt that would mean a lot of guildchecking, becuase there aren't to many guilds that survive that long.
@ Earl_Listbard
True I don't believe we should roleplay we are submiting a guildapplication with the octarch or something, but my suggestion isn't to have an IC check, but an OOC check.
It would be there to make sure you as a player aren't sneaking in things from RL or from Lord of the Rings or some other media. It's not to prevent you from becoming outlaws and try to slaughter all that travel a certain road, but it's to make sure we don't get legions of Gandalfs swearing to destroy the ring by having someone bring it to Mount Doom.
-
Well Personally I come from a pen and paper background with funny shaped dice and everything. It just seems to me a character wipe is like a fresh campaign. You may be using the same setting (World of Greyhawk, for example) but you roll up new characters. Don't your old characters ever feel played out? Wouldn't you like to try something different, create new stories? Do your old characters never do things completely out of character because you the player is having a bad day? A fresh start, new beginnings, new tails to chase and stories to invent for the grandkids. Why settle for the sameol' sameol'?
-
*smiles again*
True I have had those feelings and have had a change of main character a few months ago, but I tend to do it when I feel it is outplayed and not when a wipe comes. Also even if I did it would be hard to ignore the majority doesn't seem to do that ;)
-
That just means we have to educate them....
Of course if we allow the older guilds that are OOC or grey area to remain or be recreated after a wipe we really cannot justify disallowing anyone else from similar infractions. One thing that is imperative when creating rules for ourselves is that they apply across the board. Sure some have been around for a very long time from when some decisions had yet to be taken, but that should not profer immunity to all future decisions. If you are going to create a hodge-podge of exceptions it would be better to allow anarchy or remove official guilds all together.
-
Well I personally am a member of the Dark Empire and don't feel this guild would fail such requirements so I'm not saying this just becuase I don't like the idea of the rules applying to myself as you seem to hint.
The reason I am suggesting this is one becuase of practical reasons as I already stated, everyone at once just wouldn't work, and two becuase people have sometimes put a lot of work into their guild and so giving them the time untill the wipe isn't an exeption to the rule but giving them time to look at what would needs to be changed to fall within the new rules.
It's respect for the work people have already done. Just imagine how the Dragon Council would feel if suddenly after being told they are safe several times tomorrow they will be disbanded? That is just disrespectfull tot the member of the guild, so I would never propose such a thing. Obvious implementing it for new guilds and later have a wipe when the old guilds know of it long before hand is a different matter and a lot more civil and practical in my eyes.
-
No, no I was not trying to imply anything about anyone in particular, I am soory you inferred that I was. Neither am I suggesting any immediate action but merely post wipe practice. I am inclined to keep the status quo where really bad guilds are actively discouraged, merely suspect ones are more tolerated and appropriate ones are actively promoted. I think the GM's should use their best discretion to ensure the guidelines are met but it is not bilbous's world and I do not have the final say. I also think, as I said, that post wipe, all bets are off and whatever new policies are in effect at the time are rigorously enforced.
BTW, why do you want the empire to be pummeled by ice pellets? :P
-
ice pellets?
Well the problem is that I don't like the ignore tactic, but that having storylines that make no sence and that are against the setting disrupts my enjoyment of roleplaying. Now if this is a person this is bad enough but if you have whole guilds with such storylines you can't just avoid them anymore without becoming really reclusive.
It also gives the wrong idea in my eyes to new people what guilds should be like, becuase afterall it's often new guilds that recruit new people a lot and so this is the first guild they often come into contact with.
Personally I would also rather hear my story is not acceptable when I want to start a guild then when I'm halfway through building the guild. It also dissapoints more people at that point becuase of all the people I recruited.
Also at the moment names are already changed ingame fo r not being apropriate. Isn't it kind of strange to do that when the guild has already touched peoples RPs? Making some RPs even invalid perhaps? Isn't it also not strange to alter a name but not the whole story behind it that is perhaps even worse then the name in distuptiveness?
-
hail
Hail \Hail\ (h[=a]l), n. [OE. hail, ha[yogh]el, AS. h[ae]gel,
hagol; akin to D., G., Dan., & Sw. hagel; Icel. hagl; cf. Gr.
ka`chlhx pebble.]
Small roundish masses of ice precipitated from the clouds,
where they are formed by the congelation of vapor. The
separate masses or grains are called hailstones.
[1913 Webster]
I find I ignore the guilds quite nicely by turning off the guildname banner so I am not bothered by out of context, out of context banners. Yes I meant to say that twice as the banners are out of context in and of themself so a bad quild name is just compounding the problem. As far as unacceptable stories I just write them off as the ravings of lunatics or the profoundly misguided. Even in real life you have all sorts of people who believe and act oddly, out of character for the population. I suppose I am a good example although I think I am normal and everyone else is insane. Clearly, though if you knew me you would think I was extremely odd at best. At least I am not begging for change at airports in smelly robes.
People believe all sorts of crazy stuff and run their lives to match, why should the PS world be any different?
My personal role play is pretty mundane, I do not have great adventures, I do not get caught up is wild intrigue, I just go on about my business and talk to a few people or not. If I feel particularly adventurous I'll go ulber hunting but I haven't done much of that lately. As far as the NPC quests go, there doesn't seem to be much about them that is particularly worth the name quest, errand seems more appropriate. I haven't done too many, however, so there might be better ones I've missed.
I am not sure what you are trying to say in the last paragraph, I am not even certain what an invalid role play is. As far as I am concerned a lot of what some people consider to be valid role play is a kind of one-dimensional, "Lives of the Rich and Famous" melodrama that might as well be "The Bold and the Beautiful" or "The Young and the Restless" soap opera. Is that really valid role play or am I out of touch? If it floats yer boat I guess it is all good. It is not for me to say yeah or nay.
-
@ Earl_Listbard
True I don't believe we should roleplay we are submiting a guildapplication with the octarch or something, but my suggestion isn't to have an IC check, but an OOC check.
It would be there to make sure you as a player aren't sneaking in things from RL or from Lord of the Rings or some other media. It's not to prevent you from becoming outlaws and try to slaughter all that travel a certain road, but it's to make sure we don't get legions of Gandalfs swearing to destroy the ring by having someone bring it to Mount Doom.
Ah but the GM's do already have this handled, IE: a guild named jedi academy (from a star wars based multi player game) was forced to rename and become more geared into role play. Theres little point in asking for a guild application as its just more work for the moderators, and if there are ooc guilds they are naturaly spotted, and corrected.
-EL
-
I do like this idea and think it is a lot more IC than simply paying a few tria and having a couple people who want in.
The only thing I can think is how would you feel if someone decided your guild was unworthy and was disbanded? I personally, as leader of a guild, would be devestated and would no longer bother with the game. I think many other players would react in a similar manner. It is my guild that keeps me logging into the game.
Already existing guilds should of course get a chance to improve themselves instead of being disbanded without notice. As a matter of fact if this becomes a rule all guilds should be pointed on their flaws so that they can fix them instead of just being denied guildship.
Another suggestion is not letting GMs choose whether or not a guild idea is valid but leaving it up to the people. This could be done later in the game by creating a posting board (IC) where guild ideas can be presented and people can sign the petition for them or not. A guild would have to gather, say one hundred votes before it is approved and can be created. People could visit the board and sign their name under a specific guild idea, this way GMs are not needed and the action is completely IC.
-
But how much sense would it make from the perspective of RP to have the public decide what sort of guilds are allowed? :> That's not how guilds are started in the medieval world. Plus I'm not sure I would trust the public to make good IC decisions all of the time once we get more and more players in, who may have no idea how PlaneShift is supposed to function. When proposing quality control, I don't necessarily see this as a step forward - even though it has that potential.
Poorly made guilds don't survive too long already, and the only real issue we seem to have is one of cookie cutter "helpers," who want a guild because they want a guild. Personally I like Garile's idea :] Old guilds, new guilds, I don't discriminate. If you've been around for a while, chances are you already know what may need fixing and why you haven't done so would be a mystery worth looking into.
As far as I am concerned a lot of what some people consider to be valid role play is a kind of one-dimensional, "Lives of the Rich and Famous" melodrama that might as well be "The Bold and the Beautiful" or "The Young and the Restless" soap opera.
This is pure genius and truth.
-
Poorly made guilds don't survive too long already...
I couldn't agree with this more. Even very "well thought out guilds" fail from time to time. I also agree with the poster who said something along the lines of "who's to choose and how can one dictate what collection of ideas people are going to choose to follow?" (Of course I am paraphrasing.) I guess the quick answer is, "the GMs". But do they need more burden? Guilds will come and go. The Helpers will continue to sprout and most will wither. (They exist because their creators feel some form of "help" is lacking, btw.)
I feel the current system is pretty good for a pre-beta game. It limits the number of guilds by it's requirements (at least it did when 20k was "a lot" of money) and could actually be IC if we gave the money to an NPC that was sanctioned by the "Rulers" to form official guilds.
Hhhmmm, I guess that doesn't work too well with "secret" guilds - not too secret. And I guess one wouldn't want the "Rulers" to know you existed if your guild's goal was to bring them down...
Besides a barrier to entry, what is the purpose of the 20k? I know that in medieval times official guilds paid a "tax" for the right to exist and I believe they were continually taxed after that point. They also benefitted financially from their formation as they were given the exclusive right by the ruler of the day to perform some task. PS guilds are not guilds in this sense (eventhough some have tried to make this type of guild). They are a collection of players that have decided to join together under a common belief/function/friendship. So the question arises, who's to judge the binding from an IC point of view other than the players themselves? If their purpose for existing fails, the "guild" will fail.
So who (other than the annoyance of the "elite") does the formation of fifty newb guilds a day hurt? Does it reflect on the quality of PS? Is that what we are trying to police here?
So after dragging you all through my thought process, I think maybe the barrier to enter is fine the way it is and considerd OOC to protect the secret guilds right to exist. Perhaps the amount should be 200k paid to the ether and five members for the purpose of OOC game mechanics?
Or maybe it should cost 200k to register a guild with an NPC, but secret guilds cost nothing? This might be a very attractive solution and be IC (or more closely IC). In either case, five members still being required. Even guilds whose purpose is to bring an end to the rulers may wish to register under the guise of some other motivation to obtain "stature".
In any case, I'm sure these aren't new ideas.
Araye
-
It seems to me that even secret guilds are not so secret and instead of being free should be regulated by the underworld kingpin's minion (npc) so that one way or another you end up paying. The legitimate officials may know nothing of secret societies but the underworld has different methods available and commonly know everything the officials know and more.
-
I like that idea!
-
I of course like the idea of a screening process for guilds. It has been lacking for ages. The current system has finally cut down the amount of guilds being created, but it didn't improve the quality.
Poorly made guilds don't survive too long already...
I couldn't agree with this more.
Couldn't disagree more. I seriously wonder how one can come to conclude that, as it is not the case, at all. Seriously, it is obvious that only decent RPers join guilds for their goals and background and ties with the settings. Everyone who is not at least a decent RPer doesn't bother, and joins guilds based on a first come, first serve system or on the "coolness" of the name, or the amount of money / items they are offered. Then there may be some PLs who join a guild that would allow them to disguise their PL as RP.
Add to that the low ratio of RPer to non-RPer (without looking at the reasons), and it is clear that a guild doesn't need any RP to survive. They need something that appeals to the player, regardless of what that something is.
It is true that the average lifetime of such guilds isn't as high as that of some of the RP guilds. However, it is also not short, and several have lasted for a year or even more. And they keep being recreated by different players with different names, so a screening process would help that.
Even very "well thought out guilds" fail from time to time. I also agree with the poster who said something along the lines of "who's to choose and how can one dictate what collection of ideas people are going to choose to follow?" (Of course I am paraphrasing.) I guess the quick answer is, "the GMs". But do they need more burden? Guilds will come and go. The Helpers will continue to sprout and most will wither. (They exist because their creators feel some form of "help" is lacking, btw.)
That may be, but then again I never felt that way, possibly because I had read up on PS before joining. And yes, I think this can, and in fact should, be expected from every prospect player.
Anyway, as Karyuu has said, the playerbase is not a good judge. Not even now, being comparatively small, and certainly not once it gets larger. Just look at the amount of one-day players that rush through PS. They more than outnumber the "constant" playerbase, even counting all the players who don't stay for more than a month. IOW, if the playerbase was to judge, there'd be favouritism at best, and complete inconsistency at average.
In light of this, the GMs do seem like the most appropriate thing, but then again they are quite busy usually, so even though much more bad char names pop up, judging guild backgrounds would be much more work. However, knowing that one's guild has to be approved might serve to discourage knee-jerk guilds and thus cut down on guild creations. On the downside, it might lead people to claim that if it was approved, nothing needed to be improved as "it's perfectly fine, the GMs said so", just as we get with names already.
So who (other than the annoyance of the "elite") does the formation of fifty newb guilds a day hurt? Does it reflect on the quality of PS? Is that what we are trying to police here?
Well, I think that the "elite" of RPers should be what matters, yes. It's not like you'd have to be particularly great to become part of this "elite". Besides, yes, it does reflect on the quality of PS, as has been said. It creates false impressions, and invites new players to go the wrong way about PS or RP in general, thereby also hurting the quality of RP in the long run.
Also, though that is not that much of a problem as it used to be, I don't like being asked to join guilds by people that I haven't even seen around yet, let alone RP'd with, so it's a matter of bothering people, too.
Now, regarding the wipe / bilbous: I, too, come from a P&P environment. However, I most definitely am one who does, in no way or form, RP wipes of anything. A wipe is nothing but OOC, and therefore must not have effect IC-ly. In P&P RPGs you may start over, but that is an uniamous group decision. In an MMORPG, this sort of thing can never happen, because it will be impossible to get every single player to agree. Also, it would not make sense in terms of the consistent world.
The only exception to this is when, at the same time as the wipe occurs, a significant change to the settings is released that more or less forces a reevaluation of one's character. However, this then is not a result of the wipe, the wipe is merely coinciding with it. Such changes can occur at any other point in time as well and require the exact same action. Wipes are being done to erase effects of OOC mishappenings like imbalances in the game mechanics, excessive abuse/cheating or loss of database content, and have nothing to do with RP, just as server crashes don't.
As has been said, if your character feels played out, then you phase it out and create a new one. It should not be done lightly, and it's clearly a good idea to keep the old one around. However, if we had a wipe each 100th time some player feels their char is played out, we'd have weekly wipes.
As far as I am concerned a lot of what some people consider to be valid role play is a kind of one-dimensional, "Lives of the Rich and Famous" melodrama that might as well be "The Bold and the Beautiful" or "The Young and the Restless" soap opera.
I wouldn't go as far as to say that this is genius, but I agree. However, I must say that it is realistic even. IRL you simply don't often get to see this stuff, but it still happens all the time. And I think that IRL the majority of people can be called "one-dimensional" as well. I think that it is occuring in PS because people find it amusing, much more amusing than IRL because it doesn't actually matter in PS, and because they can / are forced to have all the other "normal" stuff IRL already. Maybe PS is like being somewhat of a celebrity and somewhat of a paparazzo at the same time. Also, there are, at least occasionally, really interesting stories popping up, and intrigues, bribing and corruption are much more common IRL than the usual save-the-world scenarios from RPGs. This is not to say that one shouldn't stay grounded with the drama, it does become excessive at times.
Back to the guilds: regardless of whether or not the guild manages to attract players, this attraction is always OOC. Therefore, the judgement of whether or not a guild fits into PS is OOC as well. This has the added benefit of being less biased towards benevolent guilds. Since the entire matter of fitting in is OOC, I see no need to drag this process IC. IRL guilds and anything that would make use of the guild system in PS are being created completely IC-ly, simply because there is no OOC IRL. IOW, IRL nothing that doesn't fit within the setting comes to exist, and it matters not if it fits into the current regime / region / whatever, it's still IC. In PS, however, it is possible to have clearly OOC things, and this is to be policed.
To elaborate on this by example of a gray area:
A cult that worships some diety that doesn't exist in PS.
Variant A: The guild post claims that this diety exists
Variant B: The guild post states that the diety does not actually exist
Variant A is outside the setting, because the guild post is OOC and thus the intention is to change the settings to include some arbitrary diety, and the post will likely include something to "justify" it's existance.
Variant B is inside the setting, because no claim is made about the settings; it is merely stated that the member's IC belief is that the diety exists, while the players know that it does not. This post will likely include some reasoning on what makes the members believe in this diety.
Transposing this to RL, variant B happens everywhere all the time, while variant A cannot even be concieved. IRL one cannot think up OOC ideas, and therefore, when RP'd properly, characters cannot, either.
Summarising, I think it would be possible to have at least a minimum standard for guilds, and that GMs or a GM-like commitee would be a good judging body, but I feel that anything beyond guild names would be impractical. If any such thing is implemented, then I, too, think that it should immediately apply to new guilds, while established guilds are given a grace period of maybe a few months before they are either OK'd or disbanded. If one creates rules, they must apply to everyone equally.
If you've been around for a while, chances are you already know what may need fixing and why you haven't done so would be a mystery worth looking into.
In fact, as has been my stance all the time, if someone has been around for a while and not fixed things, then there is something wrong about the player. Claiming that there weren't (significant) rules in the past isn't valid. The ones that would have trouble are those who are border-cases already and undoubtedly know that. Therefore they should have changed already without explicit rules, not (pretend to) be surprised once explicit rules are set down. The grace period therefore is merely an act of kindness, which those who it is given to have not shown.
-
I like your responses Seytra. I can't think of any guilds that are poorly designed (at present) that have survived a long time (more than six months), but I don't get out like I used to either. Other than that, I think I agree with you. BUT is your conclusion that there should be a "council" that polices ONLY guild names (because any more would be difficult to do)? So if they have a good guild name, they're in? What have I missed?
Araye
-
True Karyuu, it's not how it was done in the middle ages but to be blunt that is no argument for why it shouldn't be done that way in PS. Glyphs didn't exist in medieval times either.
I do agree that the players don't always judge guilds right, this is why there won't be a duty to vouch for a guild but a possibility. Most likely those players who can't judge, don't care and they won't bother to look at the guild requests in-game. I do acknowledge the possibility of bribing players for guild creations, this is in character a possible way .. I don't refute that power gives money and votes in reality. The number of players increasing should probably be reflected on the number of signatures required to approve a guild though. That way it will always be hard to just randomly get people to vote for you.
As for the poorly made guilds ... I agree with Araye. If you look around you see that mass recruiting practically always wins against an excellent background story.
-
I can't think of any guilds that are poorly designed (at present) that have survived a long time (more than six months), but I don't get out like I used to either.
Neither do I, but even if there aren't any ATM, this is not an effect of the current system. In fact I expect some that exist now to last for several months.
Just to be sure: "poorly designed", in the context presented here, is not limited to ranks, structure and such (which tend to be the first things to be in place, anyway). It includes, among other things, the goals, recruitment policy, RP emphasis, background and, possibly most importantly, how well everything ties in with the setting of PS. The most prominent examples are race-specific guilds (some would argue about that), but also remote kingdoms and such fall into that category. Some even survive only because the members know each other IRL, or because the "goals" are so broad that they don't impact on the char, or keep anyone from joining. One doesn't need to go back to the days of "ELite" to find examples. And in terms of the forming period of a newbie, or an RP storyline that one follows, even a few weeks can be a long time.
Eventually they all die, but that happens to the RP guilds as well.
BUT is your conclusion that there should be a "council" that polices ONLY guild names (because any more would be difficult to do)? So if they have a good guild name, they're in? What have I missed?
Sorry to have been unclear. They were supposed to be different things. The "council" would do a proper evaluation, as it's more or less sole purpose would be to check and annotate guild applications. If no such council can be formed (likely for lack of time / acceptable players), then this cannot be put on the GM table, and so it would need to be reduced to a name check or something equally minor but still somewhat better than ATM. Even if it were to just check names, it would prevent the problems that retroactive changes create, and possibly serve as reminder to re-check the guild idea.
Edit:
@Zan: there should at least be some time (possibly months) you would have to have been ingame to be able to vote for a guild.
-
Sorry to have been unclear. They were supposed to be different things. The "council" would do a proper evaluation, as it's more or less sole purpose would be to check and annotate guild applications. If no such council can be formed (likely for lack of time / acceptable players), then this cannot be put on the GM table, and so it would need to be reduced to a name check or something equally minor but still somewhat better than ATM. Even if it were to just check names, it would prevent the problems that retroactive changes create, and possibly serve as reminder to re-check the guild idea.
Surely these forums are a form of this as more than a couple of people here will rip apart any below standard guild posts, making it compulsory to post could be the solution.
-
With pleasure. The only problem is that much of what goes on here is opinion.
-
(IC) where guild ideas can be presented and people can sign the petition for them or not. A guild would have to gather, say one hundred votes before it is approved and can be created. People could visit the board and sign their name under a specific guild idea, this way GMs are not needed and the action is completely IC.
Yes but many people who allow their IC relations to affect their ooc relations (applies to MANY) may not like the guild, not because its a bad idea, so much as they dislike the people, or the guild's cause.
-EL
-
Well I think Zans post already lists why public votes on this wouldn't be in the interest of quality.
I mean giving tria to someone to vote for something that is OOC? That is using IC power of money to affect something OOC.
The checking of a guild would be a tottally Out Of Character thing. Players will be judged if they wrote something their character could possibly come up with it and if the player doesn't bring in OOC elements. Therefor when judging any IC attachments can't play a role and so if the general public can't make that distinction they can't be the ones to decide.
Also it would require a lot of knowledge of the setting to be able to judge a guild application accurately and sent it back with what needs changing.
As for who would be judging I suppose it would mean new positions directly accountable to Talad and our settings dev Darkmoon as they are the only ones that know some stuff about the setting. However I still personally don't see it as such a big job that would need a huge team to complete. It would after all not be a quality police just a setting checker unless decided differently by Talad.
If the story is terribly boring but it complies with the setting I don't see why the settingcheck would send it back not allowing it. Lets just hope noone would join such a guild.
-
True Karyuu, it's not how it was done in the middle ages but to be blunt that is no argument for why it shouldn't be done that way in PS. Glyphs didn't exist in medieval times either.
I do agree that the players don't always judge guilds right, this is why there won't be a duty to vouch for a guild but a possibility. Most likely those players who can't judge, don't care and they won't bother to look at the guild requests in-game. I do acknowledge the possibility of bribing players for guild creations, this is in character a possible way .. I don't refute that power gives money and votes in reality. The number of players increasing should probably be reflected on the number of signatures required to approve a guild though. That way it will always be hard to just randomly get people to vote for you.
As for the poorly made guilds ... I agree with Araye. If you look around you see that mass recruiting practically always wins against an excellent background story.
That would be fully OOC... how many characters(normal citizens) would approve the founding of guilds like "The Outlaws" for example?
"As for the poorly made guilds ... I agree with Araye. If you look around you see that mass recruiting practically always wins against an excellent background story."
Unless you do not care about having something written below name of the members of your organization and is willing to make the organization exists purely as roleplay instead of existing officially in game for as long as necessary.
About settings, you should give a chance for them to adapt and not just trash away an organization or guild immediately.
"It includes, among other things, the goals, recruitment policy, RP emphasis, background and, possibly most importantly, how well everything ties in with the setting of PS...but also remote kingdoms and such fall into that category. "
I hope that this (http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=27043.0) (A Political, Economical and Social organization inside Yliakum and a conceptual "kindgom" that may become another legend like Kadaikos if the settlers succeed, fully isolated from Yliakum)is not included on these poorly designed "guilds".
But something is very important to remember, if Planeshift becomes too "Orthodox" about the grey area(not developed yet parts of the setting), the result will be that some people that make interesting roleplays will be very willing to leave.
-
Now, regarding the wipe / bilbous: I, too, come from a P&P environment. However, I most definitely am one who does, in no way or form, RP wipes of anything. A wipe is nothing but OOC, and therefore must not have effect IC-ly. In P&P RPGs you may start over, but that is an uniamous group decision. In an MMORPG, this sort of thing can never happen, because it will be impossible to get every single player to agree. Also, it would not make sense in terms of the consistent world.
The only exception to this is when, at the same time as the wipe occurs, a significant change to the settings is released that more or less forces a reevaluation of one's character. However, this then is not a result of the wipe, the wipe is merely coinciding with it. Such changes can occur at any other point in time as well and require the exact same action. Wipes are being done to erase effects of OOC mishappenings like imbalances in the game mechanics, excessive abuse/cheating or loss of database content, and have nothing to do with RP, just as server crashes don't.
Any campaign I was in that ended was generally due to the GM deciding we had got too high level to make adventures for and he had these new adventures for start-up characters. The players rarely got a vote.
As far as in contextly events go, if you have had your character for say 5 years (might be a few that old??? I am a little unclear of the games timeline but if people keep recreating their characters...) then they would have aged a lifetime (30 game years) by medieval expectations and likely have one foot in the grave. I would imagine climbing out of the DR takes a permanent toll and the older you are the harder it gets although this is far from the implimentation stage. If you keep your character another 10 years it will have aged 60 more years. I do not think exceptional lifespans should be taken as a given, in some mythos elves live forever except for mishap. I see no call for lifespans even as long as modern mans (around 80 years currently in the developed world) in a medieval setting.
Of course magic could be considered to extend life expectancy somewhat although there is no rejuvenating magic currently known. Surely the healing spells and potions are not effective against all diseases and age related effects (also not implimented).
As far as a context for a character wipe, it goes something like this: Laanx says "hey Talad, I'm getting bored of my worshippers, how about you?" Talad replies "Ya I know what you mean, it is the same old same old all the time, wanna wipe them all out and start fresh?" Laanx replies "Done. Lets hope the new ones are a little more entertaining." Gods can be so capricious at times. Who gets to be "Noah"?
As has been said, if your character feels played out, then you phase it out and create a new one. It should not be done lightly, and it's clearly a good idea to keep the old one around. However, if we had a wipe each 100th time some player feels their char is played out, we'd have weekly wipes.
You are putting the cart before the horse here, no-one is suggesting having a general wipe due to player ennui. We or I, rather, was suggesting that a wipe was a good time for a fresh start. New functionality, a major improvement is the likely reason to have a wipe. So a new age of the realm should have new inhabitants. I am not sure if the plan is to keep the current npc's for all eternity but I would expect that ultimately it is not and that the currently implimented npc's and quests are there as placeholders. I would assume that for a game that places a high premium on Role Play to have static npc's would be intolerable. What is needed and perhaps has been bandied about amongst the devs is a way to generate npc's and quests on the fly. I am talking about the dimest future and ideal outcome.
Guess that is enough rambling for one post.
-
As far as a context for a character wipe, it goes something like this: Laanx says "hey Talad, I'm getting bored of my worshippers, how about you?" Talad replies "Ya I know what you mean, it is the same old same old all the time, wanna wipe them all out and start fresh?" Laanx replies "Done. Lets hope the new ones are a little more entertaining." Gods can be so capricious at times. Who gets to be "Noah"?
hmm sure I just see that happening alright.
if you have had your character for say 5 years (might be a few that old??? I am a little unclear of the games timeline but if people keep recreating their characters...) then they would have aged a lifetime
Only been playing PS for 2 years and few who have played PS longer then me, let alone played that same character that long. It also doesn't give any reason to massively restart after a wipe, it only pleads that people should think about the aging of a character. As for how old someone gets Crystal says it will be able to bring back the dead at one time so powefull will it be and it heals almost lethal wounds in minutes. Also magic seems to be a very comon thing, just think how many magicians there would be compared to how many doctors we have. So yeah I think that would definately affect lifespans enough to not be able to guess it by comparing it to ancient times as magic seems to be about as effective as modern medicine nowadays.
If you look around you see that mass recruiting practically always wins against an excellent background story.
Very true. Although massrecruiting isn't all of it OOC leadership is also very important. However RP storylines seem to have little to do with it so the problem is it isn't something that will solve itself.
-
I was really trying to point out the the mind of a god is incomprehensable to humans. Like it or not a wipe hapens twice in the bible, Sodom and Gomorrah get wiped, were Lot and family is spared, and the world gets wiped where Noah and family is spared. There may be examples from other religions as well as I have heard that the flood is represented in most religions though I do not know for sure it is true.
When the settings mention the crystal bringing back the dead does it make any mention about the state of being of those raised or is it possible this is some backdoor to zombies, skeletons and whatnot? Is there any mention of it being able to return old people to youthful vigor? I just don't see how you can legitimately role play the recreation of a character after a wipe so it kind of de-legitimises your whole role play if you try. "Yesterday I was a fully developed character with much skill in many things. Today the Gods have cursed me byreducing me to my original state of being and I must restart the long period of personal growth." I suppose you could posit the alternate universe theory. Of course if you are one of those who prides themselves as being above training, ie. 'I am what I say I am and I don't need filthy stats to legitimise what I say I am', there would seem to be less problem as you can recreate your character with any old meaningless stats. I don't see this as being legitimate role play in the strictest sense anyhow. Talk about "little boy playing with wood...".
I am really just expounding on ideal conditions and I do not care much what people do and how they justify it. I am sorry if I remain somewhat off-topic but I think these considerations have an underlying connection with the deliberations at hand.
-
I was really trying to point out the the mind of a god is incomprehensable to humans. Like it or not a wipe hapens twice in the bible, Sodom and Gomorrah get wiped, were Lot and family is spared, and the world gets wiped where Noah and family is spared. There may be examples from other religions as well as I have heard that the flood is represented in most religions though I do not know for sure it is true.
First there is only one allpowerfull god in the bible and there are two in PS. If you read the story I find it highly unlikely they would agree on sometihing like this. This is even asuming they would be able to do this seeing also reading the setting compared to the god of the bible their powers are a lot more limited. Therefor just saying "It's godly magic" is kinda the easy way out that sounds way to much like the "Im a prophet of this and that unknown god" newbness. I mean come on. All the heroes die and suddenly don't return from the deathrealm but all the peasant NPCs survive? One should never roleplay a wipe in my opinion in any way unless the devs decide to make an event of it what they have never done so far.
When the settings mention the crystal bringing back the dead does it make any mention about the state of being of those raised
It is presented as a healing branch. Necromancy seems more for the Dark way don't you think? Anyhow lifeinfusion is already in the game and just see how fast this is able to bring you back from the edge of death. We don't have any magical elixers in our society to make you younger. Still you become older becuase of healthcare and better food. Now I don't know how magic will affect the foodsupply but the healthcare is atleast a lot better then an ancient doctor that uses leeches as his main tool. The bringing back of the dead is just an example of how magic might even be better then our healthcare, becuase if the dead can be brought back only old age would be the thing that can't be cured anymore. Just think how unbelievably high that would raise the avarage age.
However I don't really see how this is connected to the settingcheck yes or no of guilds.
-
Actually, having a compex quest involved in the creation of a guild has been proposed to the devs before. However, it needs to be hard-coded into the game, or at least modified to work that way specifically.
The are ideas and various way to develop it, but until a programmer modifies the game mechanics to rewrite the guild creation process, it's still on hold. Hope they take a look at it sometime soon.
-
A quest for the creation of a guild?
Read some suggestions on it, but I would imagine there would have to be a main issue answered before you could even think of making something like that. Raised before but as far as I know never answered.
If you want to make the creation IC in such a manner, who exactly are you going to RP has the power to rule over all? I mean at the moment we have people using the guildsystem to form groups from royal houses to outlaws to priesthood. Can you really think of someone who is believable to have a say in the forming of all these groups?
-
A "Guild Registrar" NPC is not too crazy of an idea - if you do want to gain an official status, be given headquarters, merchant access and benefits, etc., it would do you well to register with a city. That's a bit like it was done "back then," anyway. But that would also call for various breeds of guilds - you wouldn't have The Outlaws paying coin to a town, so I would imagine numerous Guild Registrars of several city levels, underground being one of them.
There are many ideas and threads on guild structures - that's not really what this thread is about. Best to concentrate on ways to "weeding out" guild ideas that aren't really deserving of the status. As with many things, having a guild isn't a right - it's a privilege (http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/7151/pleasedhc3.gif)
-
Here is a little reading for those poor souls who have been confused by other games (such as WoW and GW) as to what an actual guild is.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~gbetcher/373/guilds.htm
And yes, That is how I think official guilds should work. Secret or not so secret societies, 'clubs', and other things not related to business or crafting should have a different system. Otherwise, the true guilds are just demeaned.
-
Uhm I'm sorry to say Moon but I think you are the one confused by the name. Just becuase the devs chose the word "guild" for the system is no reason that we could only form true medieval guilds. It's just a word that was chosen and it could have just as well been "clan"or "organization". Also a very OOC chosen word so why would it have to limit what one creates IC? Don't forget the gamemechanics are tools. They shouldn't be OOC limitations to IC creativity, becuase no matter how many "structures" you make someone is bound to think of a group that wouldn't fit in those.
Calling something a guild in character while it isn't really a guild obviously is another matter that would need the discusion "what is a guild in PS?". As Karyuu said those are other discusions ;)
Having a quest to get benefits for a guild that is interested in becoming a true guild for example would be a lot more realistic in my eyes then placing it at creation.
-
I think that creating a guild should be free. But then everything from there up should cost and maybe have a quest attached. This would include the guild badges, and guild badges would have to be bought per member and would wear away as time goes by. A higher quality made guild badge would last longer. This would stop mass recruiting guilds because they would have to effectivly pay to have each member.
-
A quest for the creation of a guild?
Read some suggestions on it, but I would imagine there would have to be a main issue answered before you could even think of making something like that. Raised before but as far as I know never answered.
If you want to make the creation IC in such a manner, who exactly are you going to RP has the power to rule over all? I mean at the moment we have people using the guildsystem to form groups from royal houses to outlaws to priesthood. Can you really think of someone who is believable to have a say in the forming of all these groups?
Yes! :D As a matter of fact, I have all the answers I need for those questions. The quest exists, it's been thought of - allowing variations for evil/good aligned guilds, we just need some devs to tweak the existing process and make it IC. As for who that NPC should be... isn't it obvious? Amidison Stronghand - the Vigesimi. No matter what purpose they have, all guilds must be registered and approved by an Octarch, which has people working for him to do that. :)
The point is, it's very easy to make it in character, and to make matters even more interesting, a guild also needs some items to start with, which broadens the original quest and explains how some of the current mechanics work. Like a guild crystal for example, allowing bearers to communicate over large distances... leading us to Guild Chat which we all considered semi- OOC. If you wish to talk oocly in it, sure, your choice, but as far as game mechanics go, it can have an IC explanation and thus rendering the the guild creation quest also a tough one since some original items are needed besides seeking approval from a higher member of Yliakum governing body.
-
I like Narure's, "add a member - pay a fee" idea.
I also like Ralleyon's quest ideas.
-
all guilds must be registered and approved by an Octarch
The whole point to my post was that the octarch is NOT a believable person.
Religious orders useally don't ask permition for formation from goverments. Goverments might try to ban certain religions becuase there is a statereligion, but religions normally don't give goverments any say in how they organize. Also how would a guild like the Outlaws ask permition to the octarch?
Also making guildchat IC? I personally rather keep it OOC. All this mindreadingstuff sounds way to artificial to explain OOC stuff.
-
It's all in the big masterplan! ;) I already said variations are thought of for evil/good aligned guilds. It' very easy after all to imagine one such process, perhaps a bribe, some forgery involved...
As for the other things, you all seem to think to close to reality and want to make all the Yliakum world real... but it's not. What we can try to do is make it believable, it's still a fantasy world, we don't need to explain everything and cater to all the needs. Some explanation of game mechanics however would be nice to make them more IC for those who choose to buy that idea. At some point, conventions have to be made, but I'd rather those be on how to do things rather than another discussion about what should be IC or OOC. What you choose from the settings is your business after all :)
-
you all seem to think to close to reality and want to make all the Yliakum world real
Exactly. That is the whole point of Roleplaying. If such a world exist how would it work? If there were such things as mindreading crystals (why not a glyph?) why would it be used for guilds? Why would you be required to have one to start one in the first place? If I decide to keep my mind my own isn't that a choiice one should respect?
That is what I mean it is reasoned from OOC. It isn't logical that things would be organized that way if those crystals would exist. And personally I don't feel it would make guilds more believable either if it gives guild bonusses with an IC explanation that doesn't make sence why you would have to be a guild to get those bonusses in the first place.
-
guild = family :D
okay.. guild chat.. ooc unless you want to play them like i like to play off some tells..
's messenger has sent you a message... ;)
anyway.. crystals? wth? this is crazy.. i just want to know why we have to pay 20k to start it :innocent:
-
ok this is the first time ive looked at this thread and its 4 pages deep, and to be honest i dont want to read all of it, call it lazy, call it... well lazy =)
but having to petition, having to talk to an npc about creating your guild is all good, for good guilds, but say someone wanted to create an evil guild. something centered around bringing as much chaos to the world as they possibly can...... [now who would do a thing like that.... :whistling: ] who would second that? it would only be right for.... people in their right rp mind to say no to a guild like that. so i think this would be a great step for good guilds and a step back for bad guilds...
-
If you had of looked back a few posts you'd have seen this.
A "Guild Registrar" NPC is not too crazy of an idea - if you do want to gain an official status, be given headquarters, merchant access and benefits, etc., it would do you well to register with a city. That's a bit like it was done "back then," anyway. But that would also call for various breeds of guilds - you wouldn't have The Outlaws paying coin to a town, so I would imagine numerous Guild Registrars of several city levels, underground being one of them.
-
gee how do the moderators get so smart? ;D
-
It's comon sence Coneitic. Just like reading the posts so you don't say something obvious that has been said already? :devil:
Also the petition I was suggesting is an out of character petition you as the player make to ensure you aren't trying to create something from Lord of the Rings or something else well known.
Making such a petition IC doesn't seem like a good idea in my eyes.
-
Not all the answers lie in human intervention. I don't like the petition idea, beacuse it can't be automated and has nothing to do with the game anymore. We go from OOC to worse OOC.
@Garile, please don't take this the wrong way, but do not quote half a sentence. Out of the context is sounds wierd and chopped.
I hate to repeat myself but...
As for the other things, you all seem to think to close to reality and want to make all the Yliakum world real... but it's not. What we can try to do is make it believable, it's still a fantasy world.
Now my belief is that we should try to minimize human intervention for some things as much as possible, GM's are too few and have a lot of things to do already. Making a petition about creating a guild feels... well... wrong.
You did put a lot off good questions, and I don't claim to have all the answers, I just had an idea. Perhaps you or anyone interested in the topic can be even more creative. The real question is, who's in for the idea of having a quest for creating a guild?
-
Ralleyon I didn't quote half a sentence making it sound different. "As for the other things" and "but it's not" doesn't add anything to the meaning. The second part of your quote is a different sentence. Anyhow it's a quote of a post right above it. Don't feel quoting half your post is the way to go then.
I agree that with most things you should minimize human intervention, but unless you show me how to make sure guilds are only created with a minumum of an RP identity and they aren't creating the Lord of the Rings with edited names using only gamemechanics I seriously disagree this should be one of those things.
Also it is to make sure you don't have to call a GM to intervene once the guild is already running and so that things like Dwarvesbane are stopped before it hits the general public.
Sarting a guild should be something special. Not a right but something you should earn in my eyes.
-
Hey! I have an idea. How about making a list of all the guilds that exist in Yliakum. Then auctioning them off to the highest bidder and allowing no others. Now I am not talking about the guilds that exist today ... Wipe them out, I say ... I mean start a process under the charge of the settings team and making up all the associations that exist in the world. Then you auction them off on ebay with a minimum bid of $20.00US with all the proceeds going to PS support. Even better auction all the positions within the guild while maintaining ownership so that what buyers get is that position until they give it up. This would have the dual benefits of giving PS an income and discouraging frivilous and out of context guilds.
-
@ blibous
BUT it would remove the "freeness" of the game.. the creators wanted a free game, not a game that got them money.. maybe if the makers WANTED to make a game.. such as ''WoW" or runescape.. or another stupid one like that.. where its about money.. and no rp.. then sure.. why the hell not.. but untill then.. NOPE.. aint working
-
I didn't suppose the idea would be well received but the game would still be free. Guilds are fluff that have little to do with the game. At least this idea would give some control back to the developers. If you don't like the idea of using this to support development with real money you could always auction off positions with trias. Of course implimenting such a system short of a wipe would not work well.
As new lands get developed, new guilds or guild chapters would open up. For guilds that have chapters in the various towns there could be a governing council with representatives from each chapter. These representatives could be elected from the chapter members.
Anyone wanting to form a clique outside the settings need not have game support anyway. They are, of course, free to set up and run them outside the game (website/forums etc). They can even cluster together in game and hold their role plays as they wish. This would remove the necessity for any kind of functionality or GM intervention.
-
There is no need for such complicated things around...
The overall quality of the guilds and organizations is a reflex of the overall quality of the community.
And sometimes... limiting concepts is not a quite decent option... Just because the game uses the term "guild" not everything should be literally considered as one... specially on the underground.
About registering "guilds" to get official status or acknowledgement on the underground... what stop one from buying a land or a house to turn it in the "headquarters" or to secretly build an hideout?
After all, "guilds" do not become a matter of pleasing the interests of the Octarchs or of an underground crime lord enough to be acceptable... but of trias to fund their initial structure.
How would a guild with no RP grow if there were no "leets" around? That is the problem, the community needs quality, not quantity of players.
The matter of founding an organization should be based on internal interests from its founders and initial members, not external... or it would limit deeply the possibilites to what the existing powers in PS Settings wish.
And Bilbous... it is Planeshift, not Plane$hift ! I hope your idea was a big joke!
-
I don't know what the big deal is, It wasn't about profiteering, it was about encouraging development. New hardware, better pipeline, module building incentives. I guess it does not bother me because I would be unlikely to pay to join a guild in any event unless I wanted an excuse to donate. A guild membership would become like a PBS Tote Bag. It lets you fell like you are getting something tangible even though you know PBS got it free in the first place. I do agree that PS should avoid selling players a significant advantage but I do not see guild membership as such. Especially ones such as I proposed. You could have an alternate system to pay an amount several orders of magnitude larger so that anyone could work towards a position as well. Free does not always imply without cost. Somebody is paying for the bandwidth, why not players who want extra functionality?
-
I don't know what the big deal is, It wasn't about profiteering, it was about encouraging development. New hardware, better pipeline, module building incentives. I guess it does not bother me because I would be unlikely to pay to join a guild in any event unless I wanted an excuse to donate. A guild membership would become like a PBS Tote Bag. It lets you fell like you are getting something tangible even though you know PBS got it free in the first place. I do agree that PS should avoid selling players a significant advantage but I do not see guild membership as such. Especially ones such as I proposed. You could have an alternate system to pay an amount several orders of magnitude larger so that anyone could work towards a position as well. Free does not always imply without cost. Somebody is paying for the bandwidth, why not players who want extra functionality?
well actually we are paying for the game.. we are testing the ideas of the greators, the skills of the gms and the down right "funness" of the entire project. :P
-
@bilbous
I may be starting to sound like a broken record, but few people seem to get where I am coming from so I guess I have to say it again ;)
How do you explain this IC? The one who is willing to pay the most $$$ OOC gets the best position IC? Giving the position of guildleader to someone who may be inactive?
Now an inactive guildleader is annoying enough at the moment, imagine if you would have actually paid for your position in that guild and see it die becuase someone else had more $$$ to spend but is hardly ingame anymore.
Any good guild will promote people becuase of their contributions to the guild ingame and only OOC if his efforst involve the website and forums what can be made IC by making someone responsible for the guildhouse.
An ingame auction would be worse for RP aswell becuase instead of RP being the "pricetag" you want to make it so powerlevelers would have even more of an advantage.
-
Garile: Who gets to be President? is it free to campaign? In a medieval setting the person who got to set up the guild was the one who paid the lord of the manor and the lord of the manor got there by paying the Governor of the territory be he Duke, Count or whatever They got where they were by paying the King. The payment was not always cash sometimes it was military support, sometimes it was a daughter and military neutrality. Sometimes it was bloodline.
The point is that the guilds being an official part of the setting they could not die. If someone pays for a position of authority within the guild and then promptly disappears for a long period they would be demoted by the system. The more important the position the more frequent the characters presence would be required thus a mere member could buy membership and then never play the character again without being booted from the guild but the guildmaster night be required to be present for 7 hours every week or be demoted. It strikes me that there could be a condition where members of a guild could petition to have a character demoted. In the case of the leader the petition would go the the GMs and be built into the guild system so that a plurality of active members must sign on for it to be considered. Lesser positions would be petitioned to the guildmaster.
As far as website and forums go there would be no need for such as there could be the guild secretary, an NPC that functions as a message board and a guildhouse and commons where guild members could congregate to have discussions.
As I said before if you want to have an unofficial group of people centered around some theme or other, you are perfectly free to do so without tying up game resources to do so.
It is a radically different concept of guilds than most people have but most people want what all the other games provide. I thought PS was supposed to try to be different.
-
PS promises to be different in that it wont do something becuase "everyone does it" and look more to what would be realistic. There is a difference between that and being different just to be different.
Your arguments only apply to the ingame auction. All the comparisons to RL guilds are no arguments to have OOC money decide who gets what position.
Also there are plenty of organizations who are around, have power and didn't pay the goverment any money to be allowed to exist. There are also plenty of organizations that did pay the goverment and don't decide their ranks on money.
Who gets to be President? is it free to campaign?
1. as far as I know Yliakum isn't an democracy.
2. The cost is the campaign. He isn't buying the position he needs to pay becuase there are so many people who have a vote he wouldn't be able to reach everyone in different ways.
3. A guild and a country are hardly comparable if most guilds don't even have more then 50 members. Of wich how many would actually have a vote who becomes their leader?
Last but not least I still haven't heard why this would be a good idea. Your comparisens show it might be a possible choice, but seeing how OOC getting money is at the moment I would imagine one needs stronger arguments then that to have tria decide who becomes highranked in a guild.
-
Vigesimi normally come from the Craft Guilds of each level, and their position is hereditary. Nevertheless is not too rare to find some high citizens that are elected thanks to people acclamation, taking place of Vigesimi that are dead, that are judged inept or that are found to be guilty of thievery.
here (http://www.planeshift.it/setting_government.html) (Yliakum appears to be a plutocracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy) much like the most real countries) and During these short meetings the members of the External Circle can elect a new Octarch if the previous is dead or too old.
also there.
Thus the guilds are directly involved in the government which is democratic but without universal sufferage. Therefor guilds as they are currently designed are completely out of context.
I suppose you think making money in-game is out of context because there is an inexhaustable supply of monsters to kill and minerals to mine and that the NPCs will buy whatever you bring them. If this is what you mean by "how OOC getting money is" I do no know how it will ever be in context. If that is not what you mean then I do not understand the comment at all.
I had thought the society was more democratic due to the character design choices that had you participating in political campaigns but this is one of those things which seems inconsistant. Apparently though, the guilds have hereditary leadership so one wonders how they originated in the first place.
Personally I haven't heard a good reason to have guilds at all except that some people like to power trip over others or huddle together to the exclusion of people they disdain. The main reason I see that we have guilds is because every other game has them too.
-
hes still talking about your idea with the paying of REAL LIFE money <<< OOC money
-
If that were the case why say "to have tria decide who becomes highranked in a guild"? I never mentioned once selling trias for cash.
-
Your arguments only apply to the ingame auction. All the comparisons to RL guilds are no arguments to have OOC money decide who gets what position.
This was intended on ooc money and then I continued with the ic money as that seemed to be what Bilbous seemed to focus on in his arguments ;)
Vigesimi normally come from the Craft Guilds of each level
Why this is the case I don't know but it obviously points that not all guilds have a vote just the craft ones.
The main reason I see that we have guilds is because every other game has them too.
I know a very good reason. How many groups, organizations, guilds or other gatherings do we have and has history shown? How often is it that it was just one individual that changed the world? It's almost always a group of people and the closest one can normally get to changing it on your own is by example or by being the leader of a movement.
And even if you aren't thinking worldchanging look just how many clubs we have. A volleyballclub, a badmintonclub, a chessclub, a bridgeclub, a folkdancegroup, etc etc.
It's human nature to form groups to change things. If it is for simple things as to make it easier to do a certain sport or were it something grander. To not allow a way to form groups like in the guildsystem would make the game just a bunch of individuals and I don't think that would be a good thing, not for realism or for funs sake.
-
Perhaps vigesemi come from the craft guilds because they are the only ones officially sanctioned by the state. I would suggest that this would indicate that these officially sanctioned guilds would be the ones that are regulated, all others being unregulated.To explain what I meanlet us take the example of student organisations at a university. There are many organisations set up in a typical university but the student council only has so much space and funds to allocate. So what happens is that there is a process where prospective clubs apply for operating funds and/or space. The council looks at the applications and then decides who best fits their priorities and allocates resources to these groups. All others likely get nothing more than a common bullitin board to post their notices on. My suggestion is that the craft guilds are the ones which should have game resources allocated for and indeed be developed as per my previous suggestion -- static positions players can aspire to and the rest -- and that other guilds be left to their own resources, set up your webpage and forums where you will gather where you will in game but do not expect any specific resources to be allocated to you other than perhaps the common bullitin board for posting messages. This would have the advantage of promoting in context actions through the supported craft guilds, setting specific politicking etc. focusing development on setting appropriate functionality and generally reducing the need for OOC policing in guild creation.
I doubt I will get too much support for this idea. It seems logical to me though.