War, death, and the meaning of life.

[arxthas]

War has come..

..but the whole guild angle has been thrown straight into the mix and things start escalating from there.

It is true. However, when the top dog of a guild does command war, usually its members has little choice. Some times, the weaker ones/lower ranked in the guild did not truly want to make war but was forced to (and also many times just stopped logging on). While it is very hard, they could try to oppose their leader. It is not easy and you risk expulsion.. how did it get so messed up in the first place? How can someone sneak by through all the ranks, make it to top dog and do something against everyone else's wish..? Is noone having a sense of danger or even mistrust?

The problem here is IMHO the fact that permanent enemies of the Crusade (they are really code-wise permanent enemies where the underlying intent is that they should be hunted) are so easily accepted into the next guild. The second problem is that they are made guild leaders - that is basically an act of war itself. With this background you just need a little spark or even nothing and it's on..

I remember at least in the old days there was a person aspiring to join the shao-lin but was rejected as long as he had enemy status of the Asral clerics. Those kind of barriers seem to be removed or people just does not reflect about the meaning of accepting an enemy into their guild. Even less make it their leader. When it comes to _permanent_ enemies (that is really a heavy word in my eyes) I think you should _seriously_ consider the meaning of that.. It is the same for all of you darkelf wannabe's out there. Yes, it's cool for the first 10 minutes (as is talking sharply or getting a tattoo), but you will have to live with the decision for the rest of your life. If you put him in the leading spot - you place your entire guild on one card.

From what I have heard and got told the problem in this particular war is that the crusade is unable to remove certain people from their enemy list. That forces you to either stop playing that character or joining a guild that is constantly at war with the crusade anyways. If you end up anywhere else, like Mona ending up with the Asrals, you are bound to bring your new guild into the conflict too.

This is indeed a part of the "problem". But lets be honest, it was made just that hard-coded because of a reason. It's what people make out of the threat of becoming perma-enemy that seems to be ignored. I think joining even a guild that is in "constant war" with the Crusaders is a bad idea too. If you don't, even the Sathos and Crussies could maybe be leaving eachother alone (which IMHO could be a nice thing).

I think guilds need to start picking their leaders a bit better and not whine at the code base. Why are you in the war in the first place? Make sure you know what you want your guild to be about. Watch out for bad eggs. Note that I am not personally critizing any Asrals here - I'm totally fine with the situation as it is. Maybe I can contribute with some tips though...

The Crusaders are kind of jerks.

Constructive argument, Isengoo. If I can add my opinion in the mess, I would say they are self-proclaimed religious police. Overpowered in many ways, but they do in a way consider themselves a moral police. Obviously my opinion would differ from Matusalem's, but that is the beauty - everyone has their own opinion and as long as the admin does not point and say "xx is right" it's just that - opinions.

Maybe Sathos should just stop rising undead so everyone can see the Crusaders as the jerks they are.

It does sound like a tactic indeed. But the death priests don't get their god's will through.. so is it good RP? How long can a death-priest wait until he has to fulfill his gods wishes? Note that I know not much about it code wise, but it seems that a deathpriest who didn't do it would at least slowly feel ashamed or get penalized in some way.

And I do hate boiling down the Crusaders to "undead-killers", that is just a small part of what they do, IMHO. But that's a different story..

[fernao]

From what I have heard and got told the problem in this particular war is that the crusade is unable to remove certain people from their enemy list. That forces you to either stop playing that character or joining a guild that is constantly at war with the crusade anyways. If you end up anywhere else, like Mona ending up with the Asrals, you are bound to bring your new guild into the conflict too.

This is indeed a part of the "problem". But lets be honest, it was made just that hard-coded because of a reason. It's what people make out of the threat of becoming perma-enemy that seems to be ignored. I think joining even a guild that is in "constant war" with the Crusaders is a bad idea too. If you don't, even the Sathos and Crussies could maybe be leaving eachother alone (which IMHO could be a nice thing).

I think guilds need to start picking their leaders a bit better and not whine at the code base. Why are you in the war in the first place? Make sure you know what you want your guild to be about. Watch out for bad eggs. Note that I am not personally critizing any Asrals here - I'm totally fine with the situation as it is. Maybe I can contribute with some tips though...

Well, in the Asrals you don't choose your guild leader. If you think you can do better than the current leader, have sufficient prestige, you can challenge the leader to a duell to the death. The winner is the new leader.

As to why we are in the war? Because Luminier left us no other choice.

[luminier]

Well, in the Asrals you don't choose your guild leader. If you think you can do better than the current leader, have sufficient prestige, you can challenge the leader to a duell to the death. The winner is the new leader.

As to why we are in the war? Because Luminier left us no other choice.

I think if anyone could it would already be done.

Not to be an asshole, but, is it not well within my right to start whatever war I feel like as long as it has an IC basis? (even Mona leading as Arxthas mentioned is pretty much an act of war itself) Sorry for trying to capture you and not kill you and sorry if this has given you a bad experience in the game. Before people complained that I didn't capture enough and that was giving them a bad experience.

I know everyone likes to roleplay, so do I. So instead of blaming me for forcing you to roleplay, why not get in the game and try to change it? Leaders aren't leaders if they have no one to lead. If you don't like what your leader is doing, let them know. If they refuse to change, refuse to follow them until the leader is removed. This doesn't seem like a difficult concept.

Again I am not trying to be hurtful or an asshole. I don't want people to leave this game because of me or the Crusade, but complaining OOCly about IC things usually doesn't do much. Complain IC.

[isengoo]

You fail to take into account that when the crusade is at war with anyone that person and everyone they like will die a lot, which isn't really fun for anyone.

[isengoo]

Oh! Here's an idea! When there's PvP which doesn't have something to do with a person specifically, or even for non-egregious crimes, the Crusaders (and the opponents) could just fight stunmode. I feel like this - the Crusade has Mona on the enemy list. Mona leads a guild of younger characters. Crusaders should try to punish Mona, and not the other members of the guild, who are obligated to protect their guild leader. So the main target is kill on sight, but if there's other guild members there, just stun them.

In case it wasn't clear - every guild and person should have this policy, IMO. Why kill someone over spilled milk? Just both go stun and have it out. People get beat up, humiliated, possibly punished, and nobody has to cry about vitality.

[luminier]

Oh! Here's an idea! When there's PvP which doesn't have something to do with a person specifically, or even for non-egregious crimes, the Crusaders (and the opponents) could just fight stunmode. I feel like this - the Crusade has Mona on the enemy list. Mona leads a guild of younger characters. Crusaders should try to punish Mona, and not the other members of the guild, who are obligated to protect their guild leader. So the main target is kill on sight, but if there's other guild members there, just stun them.

In case it wasn't clear - every guild and person should have this policy, IMO. Why kill someone over spilled milk? Just both go stun and have it out. People get beat up, humiliated, possibly punished, and nobody has to cry about vitality.

Lol Jesus, did you read the thread even? Thats what the Crusaders were doing. Even when the Asrals were not stunning. The thing was they wanted to get stunned then have nothing happen in the way of punishment, or at least thats what Fernao implied to me. He wanted no punishment or death.

[luminier]

You fail to take into account that when the crusade is at war with anyone that person and everyone they like will die a lot, which isn't really fun for anyone.

You fail to take into account that it isn't "everyone Mona likes" it is people who are actively assisting her in trying to kill Crusaders.

Before I thought you were just being sarcastic and jokey which is fine, but, I think you are just being blatantly ignorant and stupid now.

[fernao]

Not to be an asshole, but, is it not well within my right to start whatever war I feel like as long as it has an IC basis? (even Mona leading as Arxthas mentioned is pretty much an act of war itself)

Of course it is your right to declare war, none ever questioned that. You are a guild leader after all. But as I pointed out, Mona leading, or not leading, is something only Mona can decide, not the rest of the guild.

Sorry for trying to capture you and not kill you and sorry if this has given you a bad experience in the game. Before people complained that I didn't capture enough and that was giving them a bad experience.

I didn't have a problem with being captured and punished until it got a bit too repetitive. And that is when I asked to meet you in the OOC room and when I laid before you my complaints.

To me the events were as follows:
a) Luminier writes his letter. Declaring war upon Mona and in case a single Asral comes to aid, to the guild as whole. Certain members within the guild assure Mona their support, some do publically.
Result: ALL of the guild is free game for Crusaders.
b) Luminier attacks Mona within Arborea. Mona calls for help. Fernao meets Luminier in Arborea while shooting at Mona and asks him to leave. Mona invites Fernao, together we drive you off, Fernao requesting the one or other combat miracle directed at Luminier.
c) Luminier kills Fernao in Arborea with 3 or 4 hits.
d) (less than an hour after the kill) Luminier and Matusalem raid the Asral guild. Fernao comes to defend, Mona was nowhere near Fernao, gets captured, chained up for quite some time and punished by removing an arm.
I agreed to remove myself from the war whenever I am not directly attacked, you are not attacking my guild or I am not ordered to join any fight.
e) (less than 30 mins after the punishment) Fernao attacks Matusalem (due to not having stopped hunting) and dies to wounds inflicted by Matusalem and a watchtower.
f) Meeting with Luminier in the OOC meeting room
g) (half a day later or so) With a travel companion I explore Ironhold, meet Luminier and Matusalem, we flee. At the Amward bridge I get blocked in by Luminier and Matusalem. After some seemingly nice talking, Luminier mentions its war and he cannot let me pass. I get stunned and again an arm is removed.
h) A day later, in retribution to a raid by some Asrals, NOT including Fernao, Luminier and Matusalem raid the Asral guild, Fernao is defending, gets captured, both arms get broken as punishment.
i) I put a note in this thread about my situation.

I know everyone likes to roleplay, so do I. So instead of blaming me for forcing you to roleplay, why not get in the game and try to change it? Leaders aren't leaders if they have no one to lead. If you don't like what your leader is doing, let them know. If they refuse to change, refuse to follow them until the leader is removed. This doesn't seem like a difficult concept.

As you can see from the timely events listed above, that is not the point.

Again I am not trying to be hurtful or an asshole. I don't want people to leave this game because of me or the Crusade, but complaining OOCly about IC things usually doesn't do much. Complain IC.

I did. Since it didn't help, I chose to go OOC rather than leaving.

And mind you. My posting in this thread was NOT to complain about dying or punishment in general. It was about the length of time one has to spend before one can go on with the game. Depending on the harshness of the punishment, that can be immideately, since with at least one arm functional, certain things can still be done, but with both arms out of the action, you just force people to waste time. And I also complained about the fact that apparently those allied with Tanielites suffer less, since the miracles from their PC priests can heal wounds inflicted through punishment a lot earlier than NPC priests.

[luminier]

a) Luminier writes his letter. Declaring war upon Mona and in case a single Asral comes to aid, to the guild as whole. Certain members within the guild assure Mona their support, some do publically.
Result: ALL of the guild is free game for Crusaders.

Well within my right to do so.

d) (less than an hour after the kill) Luminier and Matusalem raid the Asral guild. Fernao comes to defend, Mona was nowhere near Fernao, gets captured, chained up for quite some time and punished by removing an arm.
I agreed to remove myself from the war whenever I am not directly attacked, you are not attacking my guild or I am not ordered to join any fight.

Our talk with you later revealed that you did not in fact make this blatantly clear. I even told you later that it was not made clear and I apologized. Why are you bringing it up again?

As you can see from the timely events listed above, that is not the point.

Actually it still is. If you told Luminier from the beginning Ill have nothing to do with this instead of hitting the road when the going gets rough, you could've avoided this altogether. But, you chose to try to kill him instead. You've experienced the results of that.

I did. Since it didn't help, I chose to go OOC rather than leaving.

And mind you. My posting in this thread was NOT to complain about dying or punishment in general. It was about the length of time one has to spend before one can go on with the game. Depending on the harshness of the punishment, that can be immideately, since with at least one arm functional, certain things can still be done, but with both arms out of the action, you just force people to waste time. And I also complained about the fact that apparently those allied with Tanielites suffer less, since the miracles from their PC priests can heal wounds inflicted through punishment a lot earlier than NPC priests.

Again, punishment is meant to be serious. Personally I would rather have all my limbs removed that be killed because being killed is a lot more tasking for me. If thats not the case for you, ask to be killed instead. Nine times out of ten someone will stun and remove a limb as a more likable option to death. But if you don't like that option, just let the other player know.

If you are in a GEAS war there are two methods of punishment to my knowledge, torture, or death. You can also bargain, but, if someone claims to follow their leader no matter what the bargain is, well there is little I or anyone can do about that.

The fact that Taniel PCs can allegedly heal limbs faster than NPC's, while I am not even sure this is true (or where you even heard that), is just more evidence that goes on the pile of Abharsairs comment "This is not an equal opportunity MUD".

[arxthas]

Well, in the Asrals you don't choose your guild leader. If you think you can do better than the current leader, have sufficient prestige, you can challenge the leader to a duell to the death. The winner is the new leader.

In that case, I would be even more careful about who to invite into the guild. If it is so that anyone who is invited or is at a certain rank can do this - you are taking an extreme risk by bringing permaenemies into the guild at all.

Again, I do not critize anyone's IC decision. I fully respect the choice to accept permanent enemies into the guild (and I do hope that was a conscious choice).

As to why we are in the war? Because Luminier left us no other choice.

And the code leaves Luminier with little choice.

I have a full understanding of the situation someone like you would dislike this new situation, and I suffer with you if that is the case. It's just that the leader of the guild matters - alot.

It does seem tempting to interview the person who accepted Mona and hear him/her reasoning about why it's worth it to accept a perma enemy into the guild. But that would just be too much IC information and it wouldn't really be in my place or anyone else's place to judge..

[arxthas]

In case it wasn't clear - every guild and person should have this policy, IMO. Why kill someone over spilled milk? Just both go stun and have it out. People get beat up, humiliated, possibly punished, and nobody has to cry about vitality.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I usually try to go stunmode when going in a party that is greater than those who are hunted. I also try to encourage the rest of my party for doing this.. the only way the person who hunted would kill himself is by provoking it or something like that.

Of course, a permanent enemy is a different matter.

[ferranifer]

The problem here is IMHO the fact that permanent enemies of the Crusade (they are really code-wise permanent enemies where the underlying intent is that they should be hunted) are so easily accepted into the next guild. The second problem is that they are made guild leaders - that is basically an act of war itself. With this background you just need a little spark or even nothing and it's on..

I remember at least in the old days there was a person aspiring to join the shao-lin but was rejected as long as he had enemy status of the Asral clerics. Those kind of barriers seem to be removed or people just does not reflect about the meaning of accepting an enemy into their guild. Even less make it their leader. When it comes to _permanent_ enemies (that is really a heavy word in my eyes) I think you should _seriously_ consider the meaning of that.. It is the same for all of you darkelf wannabe's out there. Yes, it's cool for the first 10 minutes (as is talking sharply or getting a tattoo), but you will have to live with the decision for the rest of your life. If you put him in the leading spot - you place your entire guild on one card.

So let me see if I got this right. You're saying that people should forever be excluded from other guilds because you decided to make them enemies of yours. So the Crusaders get to decide if you can continue playing your character or not? Give me a break.

What it looks to me is that you guys have to get your permanent enemy list thing fixed. Expecting everyone else to "adjust" their characters to whatever you guys decide to do is asking too much, don't you think? Specially when it's something as retarded as a permanent enemy list in a game with a playerbase of 15 people.

And the code leaves Luminier with little choice.

Then either IGNORE the code or CHANGE it. But excusing poor choices on a BROKEN code feature is just lame.

[luminier]

Only people who have joined us, made Esquire or higher, and then are expelled are made permanent enemies.

[ferranifer]

Only people who have joined us, made Esquire or higher, and then are expelled are made permanent enemies.

Maybe you want to ask your wizard for a "remove character" button?

[luminier]

It's not broken, it was purposely made that way. I've asked Abharsair to remove permanent enemies in the past, if I gave good enough reasons he permitted it, otherwise not. It's not like this is broken code we are dealing with.

[ferranifer]

People seem to be excusing the actions on not being able to do anything about it because it's coded that way. That's what I mean with broken.

[luminier]

But it's not broken and it's not being used to excuse anything. It's a fact that code will dictate certain roleplay actions. Here is no different.

[arxthas]

So let me see if I got this right. You're saying that people should forever be excluded from other guilds because you decided to make them enemies of yours. So the Crusaders get to decide if you can continue playing your character or not? Give me a break.

We do not decide who are made enemies of the Crusade. It is coded that way when people leave. I do not even remember right now why for example Mona left and I do not see how that is deciding who gets to play. Plus, I think that those who recruit new people are very generous about repeating that it is a one-way road, the perma-enemy part and all the rituals you have to go through. It's just like becoming darkelf, it's just that in this case you it's easier to blame someone else.

What it looks to me is that you guys have to get your permanent enemy list thing fixed. Expecting everyone else to "adjust" their characters to whatever you guys decide to do is asking too much, don't you think? Specially when it's something as retarded as a permanent enemy list in a game with a playerbase of 15 people.

Actually it is what they decide, not the crusaders. What the Crusaders will do is very predictable.

I can agree that it is quite a heavy punishment. On the other hand, it is there for a reason. I am not personally religious about it though, if the wiz changes it I do not care. But I will definitely play everything IC.

Then either IGNORE the code or CHANGE it. But excusing poor choices on a BROKEN code feature is just lame.

Only the guild wizard can decide whether to change the code.. anyone can talk to him/her about it. I do not consider it "broken" since it's so extremely explicit (as a Crusader you are constantly reminded about it and you are unable to change the fact he/she is an enemy, unlike enemies that are added by hand). It's not just an unwanted side-effect that nobody thought about. It's a conscious decision.

Ignoring the code seems like outright game abuse to me, it is certainly not an option.

[ferranifer]

Ignoring the code seems like outright game abuse to me, it is certainly not an option.

I'd "abuse" the game code any day if I know that not doing so is going to have a harming effect on the game itself. I wasn't aware that the Crusaders enemy list was reinforced by code with emotes and such tough. Do you also get actual mechanic punishments too? Like stat decreases and such? I guess whoever coded you REALLY wanted you to be outright fanatics with disregard of other people's experience... oh wait, or you could actually think on your own before repeatedly and unnecessarily forcing someone out of the game for hours, or destroying the power infrastructure of other, already dieing guilds.

[arxthas]

I'd "abuse" the game code any day if I know that ...

It would be your choice to abuse the game. I would report anyone who did it. It would be extremely hard to muster up some evidence, so I might not actually be able to do it.. but in principle it is what I would try. It is stuff like that which ruins the game for people and make them quit.