I have a serious issue with the policy that allows new characters to be guilded straight into guilds, without GLs needing to approve. This creates serious havok for covert guilds, anyone can make a spy character and get in without any screening. A mage can make an orderite and even purchase up to inquisitor if they have the XP. I see this as extremely problematic in the future.
Also, it totally removes seeker RP. What happened to hunting down members and begging for sponsorship. How do you meet the guild first? How do GLs get to know about characters? I used to love Seeking guilds, yeah it was a pain, but the hardships made it worth it. It instantly created RP for you. Now, what's the point, I can join for free and they can't deny me either.
I think anyone wanting to join a guild from chargen needs to app for it, not only with the Imms but with the current GL. There should be a back story of why this person suddenly showed up in Lithmore and is in the guild. GLs shouldn't stumble upon them and have to twiddle their thumbs because the 'policy' dictated how I have to act ICly.
I appreciate that even I have used this to go straight in a guild at this point, but now that the game is off and kicking, and not in beta test and start-up, I think it needs changing.
Just my two-cents, I seem to be putting a lot of it out there these days.
Seeking and how it's now obsolete.
Oh, another thought I had.
If the Imms dictate to the GLs who is to be guilded or not, and that if someone takes a guild in chargen, the GL must accept it. The Imm is essentially playing an even higher GL. It's one thing if the GL is refusing to perform their duties, or doing actions without reason, but to dictate to them what they must accept is not allowing the guild to be player run, it's becoming Imm run.
If the Imms dictate to the GLs who is to be guilded or not, and that if someone takes a guild in chargen, the GL must accept it. The Imm is essentially playing an even higher GL. It's one thing if the GL is refusing to perform their duties, or doing actions without reason, but to dictate to them what they must accept is not allowing the guild to be player run, it's becoming Imm run.
As Primary GL of what I think is the game's currently largest guild (Nobles), I have some thoughts on this as well.
Firstly, with regards to the concept of allowing jump-right-in characters or not, I'm for it. I've done the seeker thing, and sometimes, sure, it can be fun and engaging RP. Other times, it can be downright tedious and demoralising. I also like the new way, because there was no real mechanism previousl to start with an experienced character without it seeming like a huge jolt to me. Overall, I really like being to go straight into a guild.
Since we've started, I've found that the vast majority of people interested in joining the nobles tend to chat to me about it first, asking for information and advice on the character they're creating. I've found it a little jolting a couple of times to have someone play or do something in a way that didn't fit with my world view, but so far, I've generally rolled with the punches.
Also, there is no reason that a GL would know/know of every member of their guild, with people near and far across the kingdom owing alleigance to one guild or another. Some of the guilds no doubt number in the thousands with regards to membership numbers, if looked at kingdom wide.
In any case, my understanding is that the GL still has full control of the guild from the moment the new member joins. If the new member proves to be inappropriate to the ethos of the guild/personalities conflict/whatever, the GL is well within their rights to give them the boot/demote/censure them or whatever. It is a risk taken when buying into a guild with xp.
Thanks,
-Charm
Firstly, with regards to the concept of allowing jump-right-in characters or not, I'm for it. I've done the seeker thing, and sometimes, sure, it can be fun and engaging RP. Other times, it can be downright tedious and demoralising. I also like the new way, because there was no real mechanism previousl to start with an experienced character without it seeming like a huge jolt to me. Overall, I really like being to go straight into a guild.
Since we've started, I've found that the vast majority of people interested in joining the nobles tend to chat to me about it first, asking for information and advice on the character they're creating. I've found it a little jolting a couple of times to have someone play or do something in a way that didn't fit with my world view, but so far, I've generally rolled with the punches.
Also, there is no reason that a GL would know/know of every member of their guild, with people near and far across the kingdom owing alleigance to one guild or another. Some of the guilds no doubt number in the thousands with regards to membership numbers, if looked at kingdom wide.
In any case, my understanding is that the GL still has full control of the guild from the moment the new member joins. If the new member proves to be inappropriate to the ethos of the guild/personalities conflict/whatever, the GL is well within their rights to give them the boot/demote/censure them or whatever. It is a risk taken when buying into a guild with xp.
Thanks,
-Charm
Hey Charm,
Just so you know, I told Dane that if a GL deguilded someone without a reason other than they didn't like them coming in as an imm setup, I'd remove them as GL. I found the idea of it abusive of the players, policy, and powers as a GL.
So, whereas it is true that a GL can remove someone for "any" reason, I really should qualify that to: A GL can remove anyone for any IC reason. Just like they could/would during play. OOC reasons, though... well, I think that's going too far, especially if a player has paid 25,000 for their character concept to be stripped of it without having actually done anything in-game to warrant it.
I don't see this as actually GLing a guild, simply caring for the game, its pbase, and mechanics.
I've spoken to the aides about whether or not, as a concept, putting people into covert guilds is a poor idea. It's already limited to the lowest ranks - initiate/unproven, and is designed to basically reduce waiting time with seeking and get guilds to opt out on a player after RP rather than opt in on them after making them wait ages and jump through several hoops - each one of which can be dropped if either party goes absent for a period. Generally, the consensus appeared to be that it's okay if it's only the lowest rank to skip the seeking bit.
This *does* change seeking significantly - it is now only for older characters wishing to dual guild or alter their concept. I'm not sure this is a bad thing. I'm open to hearing thoughts and comments around the policy and possibly to changing it if it genuinely appears warranted.
Regards,
Kinky
Just so you know, I told Dane that if a GL deguilded someone without a reason other than they didn't like them coming in as an imm setup, I'd remove them as GL. I found the idea of it abusive of the players, policy, and powers as a GL.
So, whereas it is true that a GL can remove someone for "any" reason, I really should qualify that to: A GL can remove anyone for any IC reason. Just like they could/would during play. OOC reasons, though... well, I think that's going too far, especially if a player has paid 25,000 for their character concept to be stripped of it without having actually done anything in-game to warrant it.
I don't see this as actually GLing a guild, simply caring for the game, its pbase, and mechanics.
I've spoken to the aides about whether or not, as a concept, putting people into covert guilds is a poor idea. It's already limited to the lowest ranks - initiate/unproven, and is designed to basically reduce waiting time with seeking and get guilds to opt out on a player after RP rather than opt in on them after making them wait ages and jump through several hoops - each one of which can be dropped if either party goes absent for a period. Generally, the consensus appeared to be that it's okay if it's only the lowest rank to skip the seeking bit.
This *does* change seeking significantly - it is now only for older characters wishing to dual guild or alter their concept. I'm not sure this is a bad thing. I'm open to hearing thoughts and comments around the policy and possibly to changing it if it genuinely appears warranted.
Regards,
Kinky
While I'm fine with the current policy as a GL, I personally think it would cause some OOC unhappiness if a GL were truly to deguild someone soon after he came in, especially after him having spent the xp on the char concept. (I also wonder what happens to guildskills that he was allowed to buy in chargen with the guild membership... would he retain them? Could that be open to abuse?) I know that I, for one, would be very, very hesitant to deguild someone who'd just spent thousands of xp to make that char (and the concept may not fit a guildless char or other guilds), EVEN if he wasn't really suitable ICly. ie he didn't really do anything horrible, but doesn't have any of the required skills or is completely IC useless, or is too reckless and compromises the safety of the guild, etc. Not to say that that has happened, but I have often wondered, 'what if?'
I think we can keep chargen apps, but if it's not too much trouble, could the app be sent to GLs as well as imms? If GLs don't respond within a set amount of time, say, 3 OOC days or such, they have waived their rights for approval and imms have full say. At least in that case, if there is unsuitability, things can be altered in chargen, or he can scrap the char concept altogether at no loss and start afresh.
I think we can keep chargen apps, but if it's not too much trouble, could the app be sent to GLs as well as imms? If GLs don't respond within a set amount of time, say, 3 OOC days or such, they have waived their rights for approval and imms have full say. At least in that case, if there is unsuitability, things can be altered in chargen, or he can scrap the char concept altogether at no loss and start afresh.
Right now, if you spend XP to get into a guild, you don't need an application. Applications are required for GLs and 'special' concepts only.
The point of this is to make guildleaders have to actually disqualify someone with IC reason rather than requiring them to qualify a person - which is what seeking does. In short, it's aimed at being more inclusive of character concepts and conflict in the game. The GLs retain a great deal of power over their guild, but from what I gathered speaking to Sephone as we were trying to hash out this policy, other versions of TI were very restrictive about what could be played and so on. We wanted to diversify and remove the ability of any one person to block another character's concept. Punish, remove, etc... yes, of course. But not block it. The game becomes too stagnant if only one person's point of view about what is acceptable and not is represented.
That's even taken into how I view my role. I validate if something is within the rules or not. If it is, I don't judge it for good or bad RP. The idea is to leave as much as we can in the hands of the players. Naturally, there are places where the imms do not do this, but overall, the aim is to do it as much as we feel we can.
The point of this is to make guildleaders have to actually disqualify someone with IC reason rather than requiring them to qualify a person - which is what seeking does. In short, it's aimed at being more inclusive of character concepts and conflict in the game. The GLs retain a great deal of power over their guild, but from what I gathered speaking to Sephone as we were trying to hash out this policy, other versions of TI were very restrictive about what could be played and so on. We wanted to diversify and remove the ability of any one person to block another character's concept. Punish, remove, etc... yes, of course. But not block it. The game becomes too stagnant if only one person's point of view about what is acceptable and not is represented.
That's even taken into how I view my role. I validate if something is within the rules or not. If it is, I don't judge it for good or bad RP. The idea is to leave as much as we can in the hands of the players. Naturally, there are places where the imms do not do this, but overall, the aim is to do it as much as we feel we can.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests