| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Display using:
|
|
A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 30 Mar 2004 02:49 AM |
There is a new guild growing in Vives and trying to work out its RP purpose in Vives. The Guild has a history and players who have played with each other for over a year and a half, and for some even longer.
The Guild is extremely well fleshed out with a durable, devoted, experienced, and talented leadership or council who are each skilled in different areas of gaming and role playing.
The Guild is based on the concept of an Aruthurian Round table made up of knights that combine both steel and magic. Currently one of the Council is working on a file detailing the history and purpose of the White Rose. In simple terms there are few rules and little structure to the actual guild, and it is more a group of friendly players who join in a common family.
The Guild itself has been through many up and down times, and is a very mature guild, that is stable from top to bottom, and can achieve its goals in game.
We are interested in adding a flare and roleplay spice to Vives, but I think it would help to have some DM feedback on how the WR will "fit" into Vives. Of course it is up to the Vives team to decide who this DM is to be, but it might help if that DM plays a "good" god, in particular I believe our group has a certain affinity for the DM that plays "Aros".
There might be a concern that the White Rose may unballance things in game towards good considering certain aspects of it, so I have invited the guild leader of a rival guild to Vives. This guild is not as formed as the White Rose, but has the potential of gaining a large number of the former enemies of the White Rose which number in probably the dozens, into its ranks, and have among them, some outstanding roleplayers and tacticians. This guild is called the Ravensguard, but the players from another former evil guild that was the enemy of the White Rose, called the Eclipse, may also one day find its way into Vives.
Lambert Jackard The Third "Founder of the White Rose"
Aloria ap Ravar "Dark Hand of the White Rose" |
|
|
  |
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 30 Mar 2004 09:35 PM |
| Are you meaning to bring two entire groups, groups that are some sort of small armies, to Vives? |
I'm The Cult of Personality. |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 01:52 AM |
The White Rose in its original concept was an army of sorts, but now it is a remnant of that, and they huddle close to each other as a small family.
I have no control what the Ravensguard or Eclipse does, or what they may know of the current White Rose activities.
In any case the White Rose and Ravensguard are heavily RP guilds.
The White Rose is very interested in making sure they bring something positive to Vives and wants to fit with the world.
In any case I thought Vives was a world in turmoil. Sounds like the Ravensguard and the Eclipse would certainly add an element of turmoil that would truly give Vives the feel of a world in upheaval. These two guilds are "evil" and I can't think of anything more intriguing for a world then well organized evil.
In any case, I am a new person to Vives and just want to have a fun good time.
Lambert |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 02:24 AM |
Although we appreciate that you have put a lot of work into this order from your past community experience, we feel that the carrying over of guilds from other worlds, especially the previous frictions between those guilds would be disruptive to the equilibrium of Vives. The pre-Vives history of that guild cannot just be brought into Vives, as Vives is a unique world unto itself, separate from all others.
We also feel that camaraderie between characters should develop and be dictated by in game interactions, not from pre-existing relationships between the players.
As well, in the experience of many of our players and DMs that have come from other PW's, guilds tend to cause more disruption then they are worth by the inevitble sidelining of any non-guild PC's. Often causing more OOC squabbles then the RP they generated to begin with. No matter how good intentioned the guild starts out, a recurring theme has always seemed to occur from the standpoint of most of the DM's:
* People in Guilds start RP'ing exclusively with each other, counting newbies out.
* People in Guilds start exchanging gear at a pace that completely outstrips both PC and NPC economy.
* People in Guilds start passing OOC info concerning quests, rez's, and xp "hotspots" back and forth.
* Anyone not in a Guild will always perceive that people in Guilds have an easier time ingame, resulting in player resentment and the ever-present accusations of favoritism.
* People in Guilds start expecting that being in a Guild gives them a bigger "stake" in the world, and will begin to demand the right to make changes to the world to benefit their Guild.
The end result is a lot of grief and hassel with very little added value.
|
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 06:36 AM |
Alo, Im totally in agreement on the whole pre-Vives history business.
But are you other comments suggestions on how the WR should avoid becoming destructive as opposed to constructive. Or are you saying it cant happen? |
Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level
and then beat you with experience.
Akril
Quinellieth. 20th Circle of the Order of the Ring |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 06:46 AM |
I think guilds if played by mature players, can be very good THOUGH the main reasons that made me be against this are:
-Like Alo said, Vives own history, so impossible to just import a guild history and etc..
-Then here people get things, like houses, special items (DM rewards ) and ect...after being here for a long time and proving exceptional RP. Not the case ( Im not saying your not a good RPer never met you IG). So get guild items, areas, etc...doesnt look good to me.
Sugestion - why dont you take your budies here, take sometime to see how the world is, then think in a guild that would fit in Vives history or maybe join one of the many guilds the world already has that are empty ( no players playing it), and develop your char in vives. That would be awesome and if your group is as good as you say then you'll be rewarded Im sure. |
Why search around when the answer is within you...?
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 01:51 PM |
We, the DM's, are saying that in our experience, no matter how good intentioned, the outcome of guilds like this on a server are always the same.
These are different from the in game 'guilds' that Ice mentioned. These are guilds in the more traditional sense. Characters (as opposed to players) working together for a common intrest. Such as a theives guild that seeks to again limit compition between members by assigning cities or blocks to individule members. This example is of coure generally an NPC guild (the Night Masks and the Fire Knives).
Another example is the now defunct Azure Lights that formed in reaction to a recurring plot line that has now been wrapped up. And even with this one, we were starting to see some of the recurring pitfalls resulting from player guilds I mentioned previously.
From the collective experience of the DM's player guilds, no matter how altruistic or how mature the players, cause problems to PW's, especially ones with small communities such as ours. The comments of recurring themes arn't things that should be avoided, they are things that can not be avoided. |
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 01:55 PM |
| From my own experience, I found it best to toss out anything I had before coming to Vives, and make a brand new set of characters born here, and for here.. rather than cut and snip an existing character or idea to try to fit it into Vives, which didnt work out for me (I ended up tossing a lv 11 character because of this) |
Three sisters, born of the Sea
A sad fate t'was in store for thee
Oh Vaisha, Vahlah and Vallaesha |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 02:56 PM |
| Yup.. thats the reason Alosynth is an NPC captain of a ferry instead of a precocious cleric PC |
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 04:55 PM |
Im still not sure I understand the full impact of what you are saying.
Are you expressing you dont think its a good idea or that it isnt allowed. |
Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level
and then beat you with experience.
Akril
Quinellieth. 20th Circle of the Order of the Ring |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 08:48 PM |
Wait - I'm so confuzzled. Let me try to understand this better.
The Guild is based on the concept of an Aruthurian Round table made up of knights that combine both steel and magic. Currently one of the Council is working on a file detailing the history and purpose of the White Rose. In simple terms there are few rules and little structure to the actual guild, and it is more a group of friendly players who join in a common family.
This passage suggests to me that the guild is an in-character association. Very nice. But this sounds very incongruent to the rest of what you say in the post.
There is a new guild growing in Vives and trying to work out its RP purpose in Vives. The Guild has a history and players who have played with each other for over a year and a half, and for some even longer.
"There is a new guild growing in Vives and trying to work out its RP purpose" - shouldn't it be the other way round? Like, shouldn't guilds be formed with a RP purpose as foundation? Or am I misunderstanding what your definition of a guild is, as defined with the Artherian paragraph?
The Guild is extremely well fleshed out with a durable, devoted, experienced, and talented leadership or council who are each skilled in different areas of gaming and role playing.
Again I don't understand how can a guild be "extremely well fleshed out" and at the same time "trying to work out its RP purposes". And what are the "different areas of gaming", distinct from role-playing, that the talented leadership is going to bring in?
The Guild itself has been through many up and down times, and is a very mature guild, that is stable from top to bottom, and can achieve its goals in game.
For a guild that lacks a RP purpose, what goals does it has? Can you please specify?
We are interested in adding a flare and roleplay spice to Vives
What spices are you planning to import? Can you specify?
There might be a concern that the White Rose may unballance things in game towards good considering certain aspects of it, so I have invited the guild leader of a rival guild to Vives. This guild is not as formed as the White Rose, but has the potential of gaining a large number of the former enemies of the White Rose which number in probably the dozens, into its ranks, and have among them, some outstanding roleplayers and tacticians. This guild is called the Ravensguard, but the players from another former evil guild that was the enemy of the White Rose, called the Eclipse, may also one day find its way into Vives.
Rivalling guild? Tacticians? Excuse me?
From my reading so far this seems to be a PLAYER-guild covered with a skin of white-roses. Casting the fancy skin aside, there is little difference in essence - if at all - between this guild and a clan in Unreal Tournament. And the mentioning of undefined "goals" (when there is no story to support it), "tacticians" (tactics for?), "rivalry" (rivalry before a story, any story, exists?) all but strengthen the warfare, PvP, and conflict-driven associations.
Sorry. The Code is supposed to be an in-character reflection of the White-Roses' ideals, yet it is written independent of anything that has to do with Vives. The same google search also led me to a page with numerous ranks and guild-masters, guild items and disciplinary actions, which again strengthen my rousing suspicions that this is but a thinly veiled ego-feeding PLAYER association.
A PLAYER association by definition includes players. The corollary of that definition is that it also excludes players - if something is IN, something else must be OUT. A PLAYER association by definition has nothing in essence to do with their characters, no matter how it is veiled to be so. I would heartily recommend its establishment, if what the Admin and DMs want to see is that Vives become a battlefield for rivalling clans, to exclusion and isolation of other players.
Forgive me for speaking my mind bluntly, but I'm passionately against PLAYER-guilds. Even more passionately against those who intentionally throw a role-play smokebomb to make it look not so much like one. In my honest opinion, I think the smokebomb is to built to confuse and garner sympathy from other players, by which means catching the DM/Admins in a double-snarl: the clanmasters know well enough that the DMs would be hard-pressed to say No, as the No can be oh-so-conveniently stretched to be understood as tyranny of the worse sort because "you can't even make a guild here".
I hope the players would understand that the DMs, if they say no, is to the wolf-under-the-skin, not the sheep that is portrayed to be perceived. I hope the players understand that the No is really to clans, not genuine guilds formed of in-character association and consequences between characters.
|
~Vanadis.
"What race are you, my lovely Guardian Angel?"
"I'm half-Sweetheart and half-Bitch. Don't push me."  |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 31 Mar 2004 11:38 PM |
I whole-heartedly agree with EVERYTHING Vanadis has said.
There's something to be said about people who's names start with Van eh?
lol |
I'm The Cult of Personality. |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 01 Apr 2004 06:18 AM |
Let me get this straight, a Player Association is one in which the Players are members whereas a guild is one in which the character is a member?
Is that correct? If so, then all guilds are player associations but not all player associations are guilds!
I think what you are trying to say Van, is similar to what Alo has pointed out. That group of players that band together for the furtherance of the Players and not the characters is wrong. That I totally agree with!
However, merely assuming that a Player Association that seeks to build a guild within a PW is destructive is perhaps inductive reasoning.
Bad Play can come from Player Associations does not mean
Player Associations cause Bad Play.
From what I understand the WR is an association that has existed Pre-Vives. It has its history and it has its objectives. However, the WR wish NOT to simply port something over from another PW but establish themselves from scratch, include the DMs and include NEW PCs that are native to Vives. That would explain what you saw as a discrepancy in what Lambert said. Its not the there is a contradiction but merely that the WR wishes to "recreate and redefine" what it has within the context of the world of Vives. Is this right Lambert? Somehow if this is the case that seems to be very commendable and totally destructive of the arguments put against them.
Otherwise, why would they announce themselves at all. Why would the go to the trouble of recruiting from Vives and getting the DMs on board. This association can exist without DM intervention or PCs from Vives to achieve the criticism that stands in their name.
The fact they have tried to be transparant, include others, reestablish themselves in Vives without reference to what came before seems to me to be in the name of RP.
Rather than simply say Player Associations are bad for roleplay, how about saying, so long as you keep to these parametres we would be in support of what you are trying to do.
NPC guilds are far too inactive to create good RP for obvious reasons. Player run guilds are far more likely to build upon the world of Vives than destroy it. Personally my character Evaramier has wanted to get involved with Ka'azim as he is orientated that way. But unfortunately since it seems to be an exclusive shop (as DMs for obvious reasons do not have the time to spare) this is not possible. Further, DMs are rightly more occupied with the overal politics of Vives than individual groups. An order such as the WR can actually add something, so lets at least give them a chance. |
Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level
and then beat you with experience.
Akril
Quinellieth. 20th Circle of the Order of the Ring |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 01 Apr 2004 08:42 AM |
Well said Evar.
While I can certainly understad DM concerns, I hope the WR can pleasantly surprise people and its members by helping to provide a further sense of place and comraderie. Lets give the WR a chance please. |
Humbly Submitted,
Sinjin Kane |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 01 Apr 2004 11:52 AM |
Rather than simply say Player Associations are bad for roleplay, how about saying, so long as you keep to these parametres we would be in support of what you are trying to do.
What I am saying is that no matter what parameters are set out, guilds, or player associations, or whatever you want to call them, inevitably, with out fail, fall into the pit falls listed in my original post. This is my experience, this is the experience of the rest of the DM's, this is the experience of a large majority of players. |
~Alosynth
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 01 Apr 2004 01:54 PM |
Evar understands the issues about the White Rose, and I am very grateful that he took the time to say what he did.
I also understand what Alosynth is saying, and understand his concerns, however the White Rose is something different because it is a guild that has survived for over a year, which I think says something about its members.
I think not to even give us a chance is a missed opprotunity for people all around, as it was my original hope that The WR would fit into Vives and would contribute something positive. If that contribution is not desired nor welcome, that is the perogative of the DMs, but in my opinion, they would be missing an opportunity to add something special to Vives.
Lambert |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 01 Apr 2004 03:12 PM |
(I've wrote this but unable to connect to the website until now)
Let me get this straight, a Player Association is one in which the Players are members whereas a guild is one in which the character is a member? Is that correct? If so, then all guilds are player associations but not all player associations are guilds!
Analytically speaking,
"Player Association / Clans" has players as members of its set.
"Guild" has characters as members of its set.
They are made of constituents that are not interconvertible. "All pilots belong to an airliner" does not logically entail that "all pilot's club are airliner-alliance", nor "all airliner-alliances are pilot's club". The only circumstances in which this 'equality' apply is when an airliner is pilot - or, if you consider a character, a player.
The logic, upon which the rest of the argument is premised upon, is flawed.
However, merely assuming that a Player Association that seeks to build a guild within a PW is destructive is perhaps inductive reasoning.
Bad Play can come from Player Associations does not mean
Player Associations cause Bad Play.
It is Alosynth's perspective that says "bad play can come from clans", a perspective that I beg to differ. My position is crystal clear that clans are a source of bad play. (By no means the sole source, but one nonetheless)
It is a conclusion I obtained from inductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning by its very nature can be flawed. But if I've seen 1500 ravens and they're all black, it is only reasonable for me to guess that the Polly the Raven is likely to be black as well, even though I know fully that he could be an albino-raven.
I do alot of server-hopping alongside server administrative duties (not in Vives). I have yet to see a "player-association" that has not caused grief and turmoil, and with something very real at stake - the possibility that Vives become a battle playground factionalized by rivalling clans, the possibility that the DMs become more tied up with policing and conflict resolution instead of having fun with players - it is not only reasonable, but prudent as well in speaking my mind. Everybody who jumped from a highrise is at least injured - it's the fallible inductive logic that tells you not to jump from a highrise.
From what I understand the WR is an association that has existed Pre-Vives. It has its history and it has its objectives.
However, the WR wish NOT to simply port something over from another PW but establish themselves from scratch, include the DMs and include NEW PCs that are native to Vives. That would explain what you saw as a discrepancy in what Lambert said. Its not the there is a contradiction but merely that the WR wishes to "recreate and redefine" what it has within the context of the world of Vives. Is this right Lambert? Somehow if this is the case that seems to be very commendable and totally destructive of the arguments put against them.
Their code is directly, verbatim, a word-for-word lift from their previous clan code. I urge you to Google it. Items, modules, "many texts Lambert has written" - I have yet to see any desire to be anything but a direct port.
Otherwise, why would they announce themselves at all. Why would the go to the trouble of recruiting from Vives and getting the DMs on board. This association can exist without DM intervention or PCs from Vives to achieve the criticism that stands in their name.
The fact they have tried to be transparant, include others, reestablish themselves in Vives without reference to what came before seems to me to be in the name of RP.
Guild items, guild hall, and a good solid backing. There is request for DM liason, but nowhere in the posts have I seen any in-character calls for "like-minded individuals". Look in the first post to find mentioning of bringing clan-members (and opposing clan-members) to Vives, but I cannot find any evidence to support your assertion that they have wish to include NEW PCs. They are proud of being a group amongst themselves that have stuck together for years. "That tells something about its members" - how more exclusive and elitist can it be? How more blatantly can one admit to being nothing story/roleplay oriented, but member driven?
I may be coloured by a recent incident, but on the other server I've been with admin duties, half the player-base ended up elsewhere from the rising of a WhiteRose analogue. Then the locusts moved on, leaving behind a battered and disgruntled player-base.
Rather than simply say Player Associations are bad for roleplay, how about saying, so long as you keep to these parametres we would be in support of what you are trying to do.
The limits of my creativity is such that I cannot see how clans can be good for servers. I am very willing to change my mind when evidence dictates so. Unfortunately wordings such as "rivalry", "tactician", and various unspecified "skills other than roleplay" does not give any weight to the possibility that this would be different than anything I've seen before.
NPC guilds are far too inactive to create good RP for obvious reasons. Player run guilds are far more likely to build upon the world of Vives than destroy it. Personally my character Evaramier has wanted to get involved with Ka'azim as he is orientated that way. But unfortunately since it seems to be an exclusive shop (as DMs for obvious reasons do not have the time to spare) this is not possible. Further, DMs are rightly more occupied with the overal politics of Vives than individual groups. An order such as the WR can actually add something, so lets at least give them a chance.
This as an argument with the airliner-pilot error as its premise, which I have already demonstrated to be indefensible.
I see eye to eye with your central idea, that character-based groups and guilds lead to a more dynamic environment - we have mutual understanding there. Yet in this specific case of the WhiteRose, we are not speaking of a character-based guild/group, but instead a clan. A request of permission for clan-formation. No, not permission for clan-formation, but a request for support, items, and backing, as the sum of other posts amounts to.
|
~Vanadis.
"What race are you, my lovely Guardian Angel?"
"I'm half-Sweetheart and half-Bitch. Don't push me." |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 01 Apr 2004 05:23 PM |
We withdraw the request for DM liason. I believe Lambert's posts have set us off in completely the wrong light. My apologies for the confusion.
Just speaking by way of being inclusive, we have more new members than old members. Im not going to name names, but we have now 6 old characters and 7 new characters. 2 of the old characters were tailor built for Vives, 4 came over on a boat for rp purposes. Its just history. If that history of those 4 people annoys anyone we can change it.
We are not in an order for items, xp, or gold. We are in it for brotherhood and role play. I for one have recieved no items of consequence from anyone in the order.
We all just here trying to have fun. This is a game.
Thank you for listening. |
Humbly Submitted,
Sinjin Kane |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 02 Apr 2004 05:11 AM |
Vanadis...
*raises hand to say something*
*sighs*
What Sinjin said... |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 02 Apr 2004 06:45 AM |
Small detail.
Anyone reading this thread and wondering as to the vives team response to the request, a reply was worded days ago. It is further up in the thread. It offers a fairly good insight as to how we feel about these things.
Ruldain |
Why can't I PM myself?
Don't iron out the Irony. |
|
|
|
|
Re: A DM liason for the White Rose
Posted: 04 Apr 2004 06:52 AM |
Ok in the interest of debate I shall reply to you post. Some is good stuff others I just cant see how you can even think to suggest it stands.
"All pilots belong to an airliner" does not logically entail that "all pilot's club are airliner-alliance.
The logic, upon which the rest of the argument is premised upon, is flawed.
Um I think you have disapplied the Socratic Analogy to what I was suggesting. If all Player Associations have Players as Members but Guilds have Characters as members, since all Characters are also run by Players, all Player Guilds must by their very nature be Player Associations too. What you are suggesting is that Guilds have characters as their Central membership where as PAs have PC at their centre. This may seem pedantic but is very important to this issue. What needs justifying is why as PA that starts with PCs and works to RP together is any worse or better than a guild which has Characters (and hence PCs) at their centre. I shall return to this later.
It is Alosynth's perspective that says "bad play can come from clans", a perspective that I beg to differ. My position is crystal clear that clans are a source of bad play.
But if I've seen 1500 ravens and they're all black, it is only reasonable for me to guess that the Polly the Raven is likely to be black as well, even though I know fully that he could be an albino-raven.
This is almost unbelievable. First, using the Raven analogy is a little backward thinking since what you have done is work backwards with deductive reasoning (which by its very nature is perfect) and then worked it forward with inductive reasoning to make it look inductive but reasonable.
All Blackbirds are Black
All Ravens are Blackbird. Therefore you can conclude that all Ravens are Black. This is not experience but logic.
If you want to demonstrate inductive reasoning how about:
"A has been mugged three times.
Each time he was mugged by a black man
A therefore assumes all blackmen are criminals".
Whilst it is understanable for A to think this way, a reasonable person would say that his unlucky experience has tainted his view of the black society.
This is ditto with you unfortunate experience of player associations. If A taints all Black people he will be seen as a bigot and a racist. Your justification is no more reasonable.
If you have had such bad experiences of PAs you should be able to point to "reasons" not conjecture and rheotrical inductive reasoning to justify why a PA is bad and a Guild is good.
Their code is directly, verbatim, a word-for-word lift from their previous clan code. I urge you to Google it. Items, modules, "many texts Lambert has written" - I have yet to see any desire to be anything but a direct port.
There is request for DM liason, but nowhere in the posts have I seen any in-character calls for "like-minded individuals".
That is perhaps because they are selective. As you may have read their membership is now predominantly native Vives members. Just because they havent publically recruited does not mean they havent recruited!
...but I cannot find any evidence to support your assertion that they have wish to include NEW PCs.
Well there is evidence on this post and I can tell you that I have been asked and I have never played on any other server. However, I had to say that I had other things at the moment plus Evar is focused on other things.
They are proud of being a group amongst themselves that have stuck together for years. "That tells something about its members" - how more exclusive and elitist can it be?
First of all, Elitism is not a swear word. Your understanding of the word is almost lifted from tabloidism when used in connection to Red Brick Universities etcetera. That is not elitism it is nepotism which is different. Elitism is premised on obtaining the best. Nepotism is a clique of friends which can be bad.
Secondly, how is a guild which selects on the basis of an individuals style, morals and ability to work as a team and more harmful than a thieves guild which selects on a class?
How more blatantly can one admit to being nothing story/roleplay oriented, but member driven?
Since there is nothing but premilinaries laid here, do you not perhaps think your view is tainted but your unfortunate previous experience. A group that recruits exclusively from individuals they wish to have in their fold, who have a code and who invite DM involvement points to nothing either way. It does not dictate good or bad RP, you need to back that up with something a little more solid. However, I was asked to join because of my abilities not as a mage, but as a RPer. Because when I get in combat I like to play tactically and because I prefer things with RP twists, such as riddles rather than swords or character development rather than blowing things up. (Although Evar does like the latter too). If this is why I was asked I can only assume good RP is something important to the WR.
The limits of my creativity is such that I cannot see how clans can be good for servers. I am very willing to change my mind when evidence dictates so.
Given your experiences this is understandable but very circular and paradoxical. Because PAs you have encountered before are bad, you argue that this one should not exist. But if this one is unlike the others and prove themselves to be different, then you will change your mind. Like my example above with the Mugged Victim, I can understand the caution of not granting the benefit of the doubt; but how do you expect this evidence to materialise?
I said:NPC guilds are far too inactive to create good RP for obvious reasons. Player run guilds are far more likely to build upon the world of Vives than destroy it. Personally my character Evaramier has wanted to get involved with Ka'azim as he is orientated that way. But unfortunately since it seems to be an exclusive shop (as DMs for obvious reasons do not have the time to spare) this is not possible. Further, DMs are rightly more occupied with the overal politics of Vives than individual groups. An order such as the WR can actually add something, so lets at least give them a chance.
You said: This as an argument with the airliner-pilot error as its premise, which I have already demonstrated to be indefensible.
Um, wasnt it me that demonstrated how the "airline-pilot anology" which is called the socractic analogy which you had applied to PAs and guilds was flawed. I fail to see how I even applied it to this scenario. I simply said the NPC guilds need DM involvment to have any profound application to Vives. Since DMs only have a limited time (for obvious reasons) this is unfortunately not possible, especially as they tend (and rightly so) to focus on more inclusive stories. That is why imho Player Run associations with DM aid is more preferential. |
Never argue with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level
and then beat you with experience.
Akril
Quinellieth. 20th Circle of the Order of the Ring |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|