I'm pondering, as a matter of staff policy, disbanding covert guilds completely in the following scenarios, and requiring a new GL/re-seeking from members:
1. Both GLs are captured/killed.
2. There is no one from the regime immediately interested in stepping up.
3. If I did this, I'd make a rumor post about the collapse of the guild and a power-player reviving the guild under a new mantle.
Why?
Well, it seems when a guild wipe out occurs, a fresh start might be in everyone's best interest. Sort of like an NPC power shift.
Covert Guild Turnover Policy
I think this would be good to have especially for the thieves guild from what I've seen of what's left of the thieves guild. I am not saying we have a bad leader now but we are sorta on our knees currently having only a hand full of active members much less members that are active within the guild/not being hunted down and thus can't leave the GH or are to scared to ICly. Also, what I think wouldn't be bad is an OOC truce between opposing guilds, opposing guilds can't do anything to hunt eachother down or in the covert/bad guilds side they aren't allowed to do anything other than getting members, when they wish to break the truce they could tell the staff and GL of the other guild and let heck break loose. That's just my opinion though.
I think this applies more to the Brotherhood than to the Manus, since Brotherhood members are not allowed to leave or be deguilded. Maybe that's all that is needed - when a new regime pops up, allow former members to disappear (and seek again later if they like). But maybe at their option rather than a default policy. The no leaving the Brotherhood policy applies the rest of the time. I thought about allowing new regime Brotherhood leaders to deguild people they didn't want to keep, but I think it fits the no leaving theme better that if they know about them, they're keeping them. If they don't want them, they can off them. Don't want people wandering around out there with guild secrets and no guild ties if they can help it, you know. In a complete regime change, it does make sense that people could sneak out unnoticed though, in the confusion. This is consistent with my general policy of allowing people to leave the guild under a re-id if they wish - the Brotherhood no longer knows who they are either.
If the Manus requires such a thing, just a notification that there's a new regime would be sufficient, since there is nothing preventing anyone leaving or being kicked out.
If the Manus requires such a thing, just a notification that there's a new regime would be sufficient, since there is nothing preventing anyone leaving or being kicked out.
I would be against any OOC truce. It just seems... wrong. Easy. It ruins the immersion. I would love to get away from anything OOC, too.
As for the turnover policy, I don't really like that either. It lets members with covert knowledge potentially get off free in the turnover (if they don't reseek) and it denies players a lot of good RP by, again, placing OOC rules on it. Personally, I don't see a problem with it. Yes, it's tough, but that's what you get when you sign up for a covert guild. The only solution I see (and we touched on this earlier) is IC, and simple: have a strong guild status-quo that doesn't change drastically with new leaders. The Reeves are law enforcers. No matter who their leader is, that's not likely to change - just like the Knights hunt mages, at the bidding of the Inquisitors, who find mages. Each guild has a goal, ideals, and the theme is built around this.
The Brotherhood needs a goal, ideals that won't change. What it doesn't need is a band-aid slapped over the problem, and honestly I think that would be what this is. It would cause more issues than it would solve.
As for the turnover policy, I don't really like that either. It lets members with covert knowledge potentially get off free in the turnover (if they don't reseek) and it denies players a lot of good RP by, again, placing OOC rules on it. Personally, I don't see a problem with it. Yes, it's tough, but that's what you get when you sign up for a covert guild. The only solution I see (and we touched on this earlier) is IC, and simple: have a strong guild status-quo that doesn't change drastically with new leaders. The Reeves are law enforcers. No matter who their leader is, that's not likely to change - just like the Knights hunt mages, at the bidding of the Inquisitors, who find mages. Each guild has a goal, ideals, and the theme is built around this.
The Brotherhood needs a goal, ideals that won't change. What it doesn't need is a band-aid slapped over the problem, and honestly I think that would be what this is. It would cause more issues than it would solve.
Player of: Alexander ab Courtland
I don't seem to agree with Leech on much, but I think he is bang-on this time. What we maybe should do is sit down and actually bang out a hard idea of what the Brotherhood is really all about.Leech wrote:
The Brotherhood needs a goal, ideals that won't change. What it doesn't need is a band-aid slapped over the problem, and honestly I think that would be what this is. It would cause more issues than it would solve.
I mean, the Manus are about teaching and sheltering mages, the Order is about spreading the word of Dav and roasting people, the Knights hunt mages, etc. What is the Brotherhood about? Okay, they're criminals, sure, but that's is such a wide margin, you know?
I don't have any idea on what exactly that would be, but I do think that it would have something to do with them being devoted to helping South side.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests