Where and what is Neutrality?

If it's no bug or an idea, but it's still MUD-related, it goes here.

Moderator: Wizards

Message
Author
User avatar
arxthas
Hero
Posts: 292
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#21 Post by arxthas » Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:24 pm

I do believe that this whole 'neutrality' criticsm is rather taken from the wrong angle.
Just to avoid any misunderstandings: I do not think it is a problem that people are playing neutral characters, and my note was in no way aimed at them. There is no intended criticism in my note, just concluding that it is pointless to talk about "neutral" or "good" unless you define what that is. All I was saying was that it is meaningless to reason in terms of neutral/good, and as an example of that, mine's and Mazarmormuk's definition of neutral seem to be completely different.

And that just brings us back to the first question: what is neutral and what role should it play? And this leads us to having to define in better detail what that is, presumably what those goals are.
From what I've noticed, certain groups in this game have not exactly made it easy to relate to them. I've had two or three such incidents myself and I can only say that a char who is treated in such a way surely has no interested in helping one of those groups unless it really affects him if not treated with a certain amount of respect.
Ok, so what are those groups? Crusaders? Asrals? Sathos? Non-guilded?

I do not think a lack of respect is a problem per se. It is a legal part of the game and does not really affect the bigger picture of what neutrality is. Something tells me that the distance between you and those persons that disrespected you is equally long, it would just be a matter of perspective, right? If you are saying people are too fanatic/extreme, then I think you are wrong. If you have a holy book that says "Love Asral or you are a sinner", I think an opponent/indifferent/moderate/fanatic scale would go something like: Fanatic person kills everyone who does not worship Asral. Moderate person says he loves Asral but does not really act against others, but silently hates or dislikes them. Indifferent does not care about Asral at all. Opponent might hunt/disfavour Asrals. You could expect the society around that holy book would have perhaps roughly 80% moderates, 10% fanatics, 10% indifferents? As for my experience, it is that most people claim to be moderate while they are actually opponents or indifferent, in which case I can understand a respectless attitude shown by really the moderate/fanatic person (if that is what you meant). I think Eluriel wrote it well when she said she tried to keep up good appearances for the sake of pleasing goodies that surround her (dishonest/opponent), but she actually does not care (indifferent) and actually deals with evil people too (opponent). Her character has her own morality (indifferent) and and does not have a strict view of black/white view of things (indifferent). And I think that is very much the case for many people, but I could be wrong. I do not claim to see all the hidden reasons..
You simply can not expect people to go after a remote goal that does not even effect them in any way.
The problem right now is that Asrals/neutrals have no good goal to even go after, that I know of. At least I assume that is the case since Mazarmormuk is asking.

What I am saying is that there is too little interaction between the groups, and this leads to even a big guild like Asrals feeling redundant. But we could also talk about the shao-lin as neutrals. They walk around all day finding inner balances? What is it that shao-lins really do that nobody else does? Or what does rangers really do? Scouting terrains? Loyal to the Queen? I mean, who the hell isn't? The undead are right there, everyone know exactly where they are. There are is no utility to scouting. Keeping ones balance doesn't matter to anyone, except perhaps yourself.

Not saying that individual players are not filling in the gaps and doing good play as individual efforts, but there are usually no deeper reasons behind it. Nothing that backs it. So I agree with you that there needs to be a relevant goal for the neutral groups, and that is why I say that good, evil and neutrals need to be thought of at the same time and put in relation to each other. Now it's like:
  • satho goal: be nasty (why?)
    order goal: be nasty (why?)
    asral goal: be honourable (what? how?)
    crusader goal: close portal (and then?)
    taniel goal: close portal (and then?)
    shaolin goal: be balanced (meaning?)
    rangers goal: sneak around (enjoy the boar?)
    skalds: sing irrelevant songs (who cares?)
    rogues: get rich (why?)
    alchemists: give potions to all your friends :)
.. plus the "world domination" type of goals that just suck... But if we take the Tsar example and imagine a Satho king:
  • satho goal: spiritual leader + judges/dukes/barons
    order goal: backing army for the satho rulers
    asral goal: become next succesor to the throne
    crusader goal: overthrow satho Tsar and appoint goodie
    taniel goal: tend to the laws, tend to the lies
    shaolin goal: broker peace, keep the balance
    rangers goal: monitor the Tsar's men movements (not a big change, but a small step)
    skalds: sing nasty songs about the Tsar
    rogues: assasinate the Tsar or help the Tsar
    alchemists: sell potions to poison the Tsar
Whatever, I dunno. That was one example of dynamics from the top of my head. But everybody automatically just gets a little more reason to exist since there is something they all have in common. Those kind of things are run solely on individual efforts today. But here everyone is affected by everyone and everyone can affect everyone. Asrals have a part to play. Admittedly the plan is not perfect, but it's at least a suggestion on how to move players into the same world. It might actually have the side effect of forcing removal of the extremes since it is more difficult to keep them when everything is connected. And you could get some unexpected interactions: The shao-lin might want to try to stop the assassin since he wants peace, so there is warrant for interaction. The asral might wish to prove his worth as warrior king. And so on.. I hope you see my point at least. It adds one more thing in common for all people. Asrals are one of those who gets a half-good goal for free.
The tower of pain affects clerics and crusaders and therefore those creatures care for it. (I intentionally ignore the insect portal as that one IS being cared of, or was for at least in the past).
I actually think the tundra portal is quite boring... :) so even guild goals can actually be insufficient. I play Arxthas to make nice emotes and act like an archer, but I do not actually care about controlling the portals. I try to ignore that as much as possible. So the goal has to be more than something as primitive as world domination or controlling some tower.
The geas 'neutral' faction has then the chance of actually decide which side they care for, maybe there should be some sort of reward for being involved in the tower of pain closing/opening as well.
I think the idea now was to do something more (I read "a third voice" here and there) than to piggy-back on goodies or evils. I do not disagree on making the portal towers have effects on the cities and such, but I think the idea was to give the neutral their own baby, without necessarily accepting good/evil spread into them. I think I might agree that it is a good idea, since people who are not interested in good vs evil are just punished for taking that interest. But I think your idea of punishing everyone who does *not* take part is also interesting, it's sort of forcing, though. People might still not care about it, or try to work around it.

For those who thought this was too long, the short version (I'm stealing this summary-paragraph now, Morgaine :)): It is most important to reason in terms of goals, and not classifications like "neutral". Additionally, it may or may not be a good thing to add a Tsar.

morgaine
Experienced
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:53 am

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#22 Post by morgaine » Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:33 pm

adanath wrote:While I agree with the majority, I do think the view on the tower and insects is problematic. In truth, if anyone existed in a world where a portal to hell opens and insects stream out (from Sathonys), and on the other side another portal and undeads stream out (from Sathonys), there is no gray area there. Sure there might be other places, but to act like it is a gray area is a huge stretch to me. there is no way this could be reconciled with any philosophy besides one ok with the destruction of all living things, by the most evil beings imaginable. That is one black and white aspect of the game to me (Not just with adan, but all chars), because it is simply pretty cut and dried;;Evil ****UNDEADS!!!!!!**** from hell trying to destroy all of Forostar is black..evil insects from ***HELL*** trying to destroy all of Forostar is black.
I don't disagree, yet if it does not affect people directly they'll not act upon it. That's my impression. From a philosophical point of view, sure, everybody should care. They don't though.
You say in Common: We're not all savage beasts, you know.
You smirk.

adanath
Champion
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:36 am
Location: Lynchburg, VA

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#23 Post by adanath » Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:44 pm

morgaine wrote:
adanath wrote:While I agree with the majority, I do think the view on the tower and insects is problematic. In truth, if anyone existed in a world where a portal to hell opens and insects stream out (from Sathonys), and on the other side another portal and undeads stream out (from Sathonys), there is no gray area there. Sure there might be other places, but to act like it is a gray area is a huge stretch to me. there is no way this could be reconciled with any philosophy besides one ok with the destruction of all living things, by the most evil beings imaginable. That is one black and white aspect of the game to me (Not just with adan, but all chars), because it is simply pretty cut and dried;;Evil ****UNDEADS!!!!!!**** from hell trying to destroy all of Forostar is black..evil insects from ***HELL*** trying to destroy all of Forostar is black.
I don't disagree, yet if it does not affect people directly they'll not act upon it. That's my impression. From a philosophical point of view, sure, everybody should care. They don't though.
You are right, although I believe this is akin to A city getting destroyed and hellspawn coming up in the Catskills north of New York city, and the rest of the country simply not caring at all.

morgaine
Experienced
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:53 am

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#24 Post by morgaine » Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:46 pm

adanath wrote: You are right, although I believe this is akin to A city getting destroyed and hellspawn coming up in the Catskills north of New York city, and the rest of the country simply not caring at all.
hahaha. Yes, exactly. Still it's not to get into people's head without consequences, which is why I suggested the disease above.
You say in Common: We're not all savage beasts, you know.
You smirk.

isengoo
Champion
Posts: 828
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:38 pm

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#25 Post by isengoo » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:16 pm

adanath wrote:You are right, although I believe this is akin to A city getting destroyed and hellspawn coming up in the Catskills north of New York city, and the rest of the country simply not caring at all.
Hmm.. I disagree with this. There is no mass communication in Geas. What happens on the other side of the world is almost completely unknown to the regular folk. The only thing they actually see about it is insect raids and those are taken care of quickly by the brave and noble Church of Asral. They have heard tales of undeads in the arctic, maybe, but they have never seen them and they don't know anyone that has seen them. They only hear about it from weirdos that carry around scalps and are covered in goblin blood. They likely think "who is this strange person that ventures out into the wild?" Most characters in Geas would be treated like Strider is in Bree.

edit - I'm talking about Arborea here, Elvandar of course is against these things.

adanath
Champion
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:36 am
Location: Lynchburg, VA

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#26 Post by adanath » Thu Dec 27, 2012 5:24 pm

isengoo wrote:
adanath wrote:You are right, although I believe this is akin to A city getting destroyed and hellspawn coming up in the Catskills north of New York city, and the rest of the country simply not caring at all.
Hmm.. I disagree with this. There is no mass communication in Geas. What happens on the other side of the world is almost completely unknown to the regular folk. The only thing they actually see about it is insect raids and those are taken care of quickly by the brave and noble Church of Asral. They have heard tales of undeads in the arctic, maybe, but they have never seen them and they don't know anyone that has seen them. They only hear about it from weirdos that carry around scalps and are covered in goblin blood. They likely think "who is this strange person that ventures out into the wild?" Most characters in Geas would be treated like Strider is in Bree.

edit - I'm talking about Arborea here, Elvandar of course is against these things.
Not hard on a short trip to another city to know undeads are everywhere, nor holy creatures butchered everywhere, this level of ignorance I do not see existent in the mud due to much gossip spreading of wars and rumours and an enormous undead army.

Also, perhaps it is so while the Asrals close the portal, but just as the Crusaders do not close the one all the time swiftly, there certainly have been HUGE gaps in the insect portal left open as well. This happens due to rp and rl situations everywhere. this level of ignorance of other actions in the mud though I would think to be wishful at best.

it is not some secret in the generalized world that there is a portal to hell not that far away, nor that undeads exist. It isn't a magic fantasy land way away that noone ever hears of.

isengoo
Champion
Posts: 828
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 9:38 pm

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#27 Post by isengoo » Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:11 pm

adanath wrote:
isengoo wrote:
adanath wrote:You are right, although I believe this is akin to A city getting destroyed and hellspawn coming up in the Catskills north of New York city, and the rest of the country simply not caring at all.
Hmm.. I disagree with this. There is no mass communication in Geas. What happens on the other side of the world is almost completely unknown to the regular folk. The only thing they actually see about it is insect raids and those are taken care of quickly by the brave and noble Church of Asral. They have heard tales of undeads in the arctic, maybe, but they have never seen them and they don't know anyone that has seen them. They only hear about it from weirdos that carry around scalps and are covered in goblin blood. They likely think "who is this strange person that ventures out into the wild?" Most characters in Geas would be treated like Strider is in Bree.

edit - I'm talking about Arborea here, Elvandar of course is against these things.
Not hard on a short trip to another city to know undeads are everywhere, nor holy creatures butchered everywhere, this level of ignorance I do not see existent in the mud due to much gossip spreading of wars and rumours and an enormous undead army.

Also, perhaps it is so while the Asrals close the portal, but just as the Crusaders do not close the one all the time swiftly, there certainly have been HUGE gaps in the insect portal left open as well. This happens due to rp and rl situations everywhere. this level of ignorance of other actions in the mud though I would think to be wishful at best.

it is not some secret in the generalized world that there is a portal to hell not that far away, nor that undeads exist. It isn't a magic fantasy land way away that noone ever hears of.
Except the cities are very far apart. The tundra is extremely far from Arborea. It's hard to gauge it in game, but most invisible NPCs rarely, if ever, venture that far.

adanath
Champion
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:36 am
Location: Lynchburg, VA

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#28 Post by adanath » Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:40 pm

isengoo wrote:You are right, although I believe this is akin to A city getting destroyed and hellspawn coming up in the Catskills north of New York city, and the rest of the country simply not caring at all.
Hmm.. I disagree with this. There is no mass communication in Geas. What happens on the other side of the world is almost completely unknown to the regular folk. The only thing they actually see about it is insect raids and those are taken care of quickly by the brave and noble Church of Asral. They have heard tales of undeads in the arctic, maybe, but they have never seen them and they don't know anyone that has seen them. They only hear about it from weirdos that carry around scalps and are covered in goblin blood. They likely think "who is this strange person that ventures out into the wild?" Most characters in Geas would be treated like Strider is in Bree.

edit - I'm talking about Arborea here, Elvandar of course is against these things.[/quote]

Not hard on a short trip to another city to know undeads are everywhere, nor holy creatures butchered everywhere, this level of ignorance I do not see existent in the mud due to much gossip spreading of wars and rumours and an enormous undead army.

Also, perhaps it is so while the Asrals close the portal, but just as the Crusaders do not close the one all the time swiftly, there certainly have been HUGE gaps in the insect portal left open as well. This happens due to rp and rl situations everywhere. this level of ignorance of other actions in the mud though I would think to be wishful at best.

it is not some secret in the generalized world that there is a portal to hell not that far away, nor that undeads exist. It isn't a magic fantasy land way away that noone ever hears of.[/quote]
Except the cities are very far apart. The tundra is extremely far from Arborea. It's hard to gauge it in game, but most invisible NPCs rarely, if ever, venture that far.[/quote]

The crossing and merchants visit Elvandar and Arborea often, when rumours abound in such a fashion to the extent that every single person that has ever been even near the Elvandar forests knows it, or Elvandar itself, I just see this as a hard concept to grasp. The edge of the tundra with a revenant generally is not extremely far (Right below the forest). Sathos make undeads many places. Trade happens between cities, everyone even remotely near Elvandar knows of undeads. Notes are placed in public forums as well. I'm sure there would be those that doubt such a thing exist or think pish tosh, but it is hard for me to grasp that they don't hear of it much other than idle rumour. Certainly as well Arborea's citizens who frequent Elvandar are well aware of it. it isn't a deep dark rumour undeads roam Elvandar lands, and past. I just can't personally grasp it as such.

Zehren
Overlord
Posts: 1057
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:50 am

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#29 Post by Zehren » Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:09 pm

Arborea's recently claimed Naarved as part of its dead kingdom. Thus the tundra is near to Arborean domain. Boats travel between Naarved and Arborea *and* Asador all the time.
Drayn wrote:Zehren, the Karmassassin!

mazarmormuk
Veteran
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:47 pm

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#30 Post by mazarmormuk » Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:26 pm

hmm, the tundra portal for sure is far enough to not be of any interrest arborea. and satho clerics are far enough from the insects portal to be at peace with while insects attack. I liked it pretty much when insects attacked elvandar as this increases a player interaction between the cities. I would also like to see undeads spread over all forostar when the tundra portal is open, for the same reason. people need to unite and get it closed.

well, i guess arxthas and me mean quite the same, just express it different.
although he says nearly everyone is neutral and i say the opposite, i guess we both mean that neutrality and beeing good doesnt differ much the way it is played now. therefore, that bit of difference is enforced stronly (by elvandar/the code/the codex).
to maybe explain that better, i notice all neutrals and goodies playing the same ideology, just that the played goodies play a somewhat fanatic, the neutrals a more or less moderate role of it.
I guess (maybe the same axrthas ment) the same like arxthas, that the southern forostar is currently a gray mass where the individual way of playing a char (ewelyn vs. drayn/luminia vs. luminier) creates far bigger difference than the guild and ideology you belong to.
What i would more like is a real visible difference not only in ideology but in the resulting actions too between the different groups, and i guess most groups have currently taken the ideology and action of taniel (from outter appearance). I guess very much of this comes from that single axis of good/evil, and the thing that delia said. in that single axis system, as soon as you start to protect someone or something, you become good.
I dont neither think a second axis would fulfill its intent, as there would be a need of a hundred axises to get all definitions of good or evil into it.
What i think fits better is a karma system related to the gods or towns or guilds or whatever,
a really relative system where mazar doesnt state "i am neutral", but "i am holy" and where every single character states "i am good!" as every played role from ic generally thinks he is doing something good out of his view on the world. Still karma would differ enough from favour, maybe a bit the way fatigue differs from stamina.
Even if there were some actions in the current system that drag you to neutrality, Asralites and zhakrinites would still be judged by the good/evil interpretation of taniel, that means attacking a crusader (which is discribed in asrals codex as a holy action, as they torture, attack, try to controle others) would still anger mazars god.
I must say that i fail to imagine the consequences of a tsars role in the game, but it would surely be a reall difference.

adanath
Champion
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:36 am
Location: Lynchburg, VA

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#31 Post by adanath » Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:10 pm

Well I think part of the issue stems from absolute truths evident within this world and recompensing the idea of them separate from an increasingly ambiguous world. There are creatures in this world that are fully innocent, and pure, creating a true idea to true holiness. I have always seen those that lean Neutral-good as not necessarily seeking to be so "holy" yet recognizing the innocence and goodness, the further towards evil you go, the more it becomes an hatred for such purity (Such as Evren represents with life, and Taniel with light and Order). Adanath currently sees multiple evils everywhere, and many people who consider themselves "neutral" he views as evil.

Right now the extreme good side is not as strikingly different due to an excessive lack of more "experienced" characters, but there are MANY up and coming, the pendulum will turn eventually.

However in the presence of a state in which You are surrounded by a deep black evil all around (undeads at every turn, butchered elf corpses, and the Queen's rangers corpses defiled and sacrificed and raised as undeads), it creates a vacuum in which a neutral good player all of a sudden finds more parity with the more fanatical good characters due to a necessity for a striking difference between the darkest black that encroaches.

There are two rich cities, that are skilled in trade, anyone who knowing from an unbelievable amount of sources there is a portal to hell open to undead much like the one to the insects would be odd to have no care of it. People I suppose in society tend to do nothing because it does not "affect", or fear, but an apathy for it I think within the game's context is far-reaching and deeply black beyond any sense of neutrality. Only a nihilistic neutral world view can be reconciled with a desire for the destruction of all, or even an apathy therein.

However with the balancing of the more "fanatical" or deeply holy and deeply evil guilds the neutral areas and gray areas become more apparent in my experience.

There surely is plenty of grey but I believe that is partially the reason why there is so much blurriness.

It is true I am sure that if insects attacked Elvandar as well, and undeads Arborea it would force more interaction, in which players and citizens would be forced to reconcile an already present danger.

In the past, every time there was an insect attack (that I am aware of) if ever the Crusade and clerics knew, they were in the midst of it, because these things sought the destruction of Forostar, the same with the Scrag wars and many other such things. In fact when I was active in the past the Crusaders shut the insect portal with the clerics more than any other guild, and protected arborea many times. although the arrogant sense of self-righteousness contributes to this, so does a basic tenet of their faith and core beliefs. Even with the Asral Castle under attack from evil, if it is evil, there will Crusaders and Clerics be if they know (at least every time I have been playing). right now there is just precious few of them, so it is less evident.

EDIT: I think I can be pompous ass so I tried to be less so(more often than not I am wrong anyways) Basically I just mean that I think the current situation is creating grey on both sides, a fear and apathy perhaps on one, and a hunker down on the other. Although there certainly are many who definitively toe lines into evil acts. We will find you!

User avatar
anglachel
Site Admin
Posts: 823
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: somethere
Contact:

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#32 Post by anglachel » Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:50 am

First to be neutral is has nothing to do with 'Neutrality' in my oppion. It only say that the one or group is not evil and not good. The evil -good axis only a hint. It is too vague to be a concept.
Would be the same than you plan an journey and only think about east and west. But there is also north and south and whats about up and down? There are other aspect too. To select the fastest route or the shortest? And so on ...
Therefor some uses alignment systems with two, three or more axis.
I think the first thing is to define the motivation and they then the ways and means that are used or not.
The game (wizards) can only give a frame, but this frame must be filled by the players.
To be good friend with all and say nothing to all is to be 'neutral'. The Asrals are clerics and clerics barge in nearly everything :twisted:
As 'neutral' (i do not like this word, 'not extrem' is better, but still not the right word), you have more choices, use it! :mrgreen:

Aslak
Master
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:58 am

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#33 Post by Aslak » Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:13 am

Hello,

I think there is really no neutral side (and should.not be) in the mud beside maybe zharkin. For the two big cities, i am sure the population of each would see themself as the good and right side. A 'good' Arborean would surely do other things and see other stuff as good then a citizens of Elvandar.

I think more then one 'good' side, which do not even must like each other, would be a great thing in the mud. I would define good in this case not as light or holy, but as a side thst creates a socitiy for a large populance. This would currently be Elvandar and Arborea, to some extend also the undergroud (though currently that really lacks playerinteraction as far as i can tell.

The same goes for thr evil side, both major evils in the world try to destroy or corrupt the socities currently in place, but for different reasons and with different methods. I would like to see the second evil (Lilith) to be promoted a little more, might it be more goblionid raids or mor eplayers there.

I would not speak of neutrality in case of Arborea, thesjust have a dfferent view on what is good. They certainly do not like undeads too but they also might not like the doings of the crusade and also might not care too much about horned horses with white fur

mazarmormuk
Veteran
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:47 pm

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#34 Post by mazarmormuk » Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:59 am

i agree totally to aslak, but i dont see a way of playng that in the given frame of how the world is contructed andwhat the code gives as a frame.

i really dont think a neutral position can be defined enough to play a 3rd role, and i also think the solution of it would lie in making the code frame fitting to a possibility to define a second grea "good" that differs greatly from the elvadarian variation, and also to close a gap of player interaction betwee those two positions.

means maybe a frame that defines two very different positions and enforced keeping those positions, but meanwhile allows andeven supports the interaction of both.

User avatar
luminier
Overlord
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:40 pm
Location: Manitoba Canada

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#35 Post by luminier » Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:40 am

I don't think that it is impossible. To be seen as a third side you would have to make some more waves. The Asralites and Arborea are already in the beginnings of becoming a third side, I think the only thing holding them back is the Asralite Codex.

Asralites should hunt Taniel's Sathos and Crusaders and all their allies, and vice versa.
The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

User avatar
Delia
Overlord
Posts: 2782
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:22 am
Location: Finland

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#36 Post by Delia » Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:00 pm

Could be interesting if the game world progressed forwards, meaning an explosive human expansion and a great deal of power to Asral.
"To be is to do" - Sokrates
"To do is to be" - Jean-Paul Sartre
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra

fernao
Champion
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:44 am

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#37 Post by fernao » Sat Dec 29, 2012 4:05 am

luminier wrote:I don't think that it is impossible. To be seen as a third side you would have to make some more waves. The Asralites and Arborea are already in the beginnings of becoming a third side, I think the only thing holding them back is the Asralite Codex.

Asralites should hunt Taniel's Sathos and Crusaders and all their allies, and vice versa.
Hmm, for this to really work I think that the "minor guilds" and "benefits" should all be moved outside the "warring" cities. Meaning scribes, skalds, Xuchal and the craftsguilds. Then there wouldn't be an OOC inhibition to go at each others throats. As it stands, there are too many OOC reasons to keep levels "civil" to such an extent to that those remain somehow accessable. But that would turn Geas into quite a different game in my eyes.
Life is but a butterflies dream
Image

User avatar
Delia
Overlord
Posts: 2782
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:22 am
Location: Finland

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#38 Post by Delia » Sat Dec 29, 2012 4:17 am

I'd prefer if players could invest into the cities and have them eventually offer some of the desired services atleast. Should be time-consuming and costly but it would make being a citizen actually mean something beyond a carried flag. There could be dimensions added towards controlling resources and so territory would actually mean something.

As Fernao put it...having most things to do centered in Arborea causes all kinds of little effects inside the game. Arborea could just be made the grand capital of Forostar and be done with it. Everyone is Arborean(that is, even non-citizens come there to do crafts and whatnots and favour the place over their own city). Being anything else is kinda like smaller or bigger slices of the PvP cake only.
"To be is to do" - Sokrates
"To do is to be" - Jean-Paul Sartre
"Do be do be do" - Frank Sinatra

mazarmormuk
Veteran
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 4:47 pm

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#39 Post by mazarmormuk » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:20 pm

hmm, asrals codex doesnt stop us from hunting crusadrs, sathos, taniels.
what stops us (me) is that there is no chance to extablish what i mean against a full ally on the elvandarian side (with maybe 2 asralites online).

and yes, thats excatly what i mean, fernao. the biggest reasons i notice for (neutral) chars to be played are ooc reasons of getting most access out of it all. as everyone fears to get kicked from elvandar and lose its benefits, their rules are just taken as standard. but thats just my guess.

i think we are currently playing a good position that defines its "good" very different to elvandars "good". Elvandars good would currently be described as "be good by destroying evil" and arboreans good as "be good by not doing evil".
I hate that neutrality thing as a fact of standing in between elvandars "good" and asadors "evil" and i guess what most (neutral) people arent at all is neutral.
So the question remains about neutrality.
Is neutrality in any case wanted or needed in the game?
Is another role with another base of "good" (which would count for the shaolins for exaple too) playble in the current code system?
Or is it wanted that the game stays on that good-evil axis and each guild got its decisions to be made only on that axis?
and if not, what would be in need to be changed? (karma system?, elvandars punishment?, arboreans moderate position?, power?)

User avatar
anglachel
Site Admin
Posts: 823
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: somethere
Contact:

Re: Where and what is Neutrality?

#40 Post by anglachel » Sat Dec 29, 2012 4:41 pm

I do not think that there is no neutral side, nor a good or evil side. There are several groups who work together or against the other. These alliances are the existing sides.

Now my suggestions for the Asral guild.

1) Motivation
- Serve Asral and increase his earthly power and spread his words.
- Gain fame and honor in combat
- Protect Arborea, special against the insects
- Protected other guild member and Asral follower.

Note that the protection of no Astral follower is not in the list. It only a wanted side effect of the others goals, because is good for reputation. But it nothing put in much effort or waste resources.

2) Means and ways
- First follow the codex of the church and then secondary the local law. This should be no big problem, besides the local law is influenced by an other church, Then can be there some conflict potential.
- Do not start an combat than the other side has no chance to win. It is no honorable to kill weak one or use poisons.
- Do not start a combat then you have no chance to win, besides the codex demand it for the glory of Asral.
- Respect your enemy, the he fight honorable especial then he kills you.
- Don't be cruel and give your enemies a quick and clean death.

This is my suggestion for start set. Point can be added or changes.

Now the point alliance.
The Asral clerics can be make a alliance with every guild in the mud. There are no restriction in my opinion. It is the duty of guildleaders to decide which is best option to reach the goals of church.

If there is conflict between to guilds, the guildleader should think which side should be support, even then this side want no support.
There are there possibilities:
- It is not form interest, which side wins because the will no advantages or disadvantages for the Asral Church. Then do nothing.
- If a defeat of one side is an advantages for the guild, then attack the other side. If a victory for one side is disadvantages for the Asral guild, so
attack this side.
- Last possibility is attack both side then it makes sense

The balance of power is no goal of for the Asral Guild. It is not from interest if the 'evil' or 'good' is stronger so long the interest of Aral guild are not affect. Of course it can be a political decision to support the weaker side to have more possibilities, but this must decide the guildleader in case for case.

Last point code support.
I look for the action who pleasure 'neutral' deity an will add there it makes sense, that the karma is drawn in the neutral zone, too.
Over other chances can be spoken, too.

Post Reply