Lago 2569 Share Posted June 13, 2014 We threw "An LM" off of the Lore Team a long time ago. He really wasn't a team player and he went around randomly accepting things and being namedropped constantly. That, and we never even put him on the Lore Team in the first place. Thus, any form of acceptance from "An LM" is void, just like any goahead from "A GM". They fired her too. tl;dr, if anyone wants to claim a member of any staff team authorised something, they need to quote actual names, not "An LM". 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyrr 137 Share Posted June 13, 2014 Looks interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lago 2569 Share Posted June 13, 2014 It states in Shadow's post both Geo and SupremacyOps. Are you referring to that or another? Missed the SupremacyOps part. The previous reply uses "An LM". Useful for general reference though: always quote staff names. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentlit 108 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I don't know why people are against this. There's no harm to it. This elitism you speak of has already been killed with the freeing of magics- and since wights can be rendered asunder by an influx of magical energy or by a stroke of a hammer, I'm not sure why people would want to be a wight to be 'elite'. It stands that wights are simply there to make roleplay more interesting as well as a way to add more dark entities for paladins to purge and for the unlucky traveler to come across. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jistuma 1995 Share Posted June 15, 2014 After speaking to Ritts about these kinds of creatures (not Wights in particular, but a lot of others as well), I have to state that for this creature to be played, you either have to make it become cannon lore (which might take a while) and then who plays one of those only has to follow the lore, or have an LM decide on individual aprovals of it (each player that wants to play one needs permission), which might be better or worse considering what you want done with this creature. They fall into rule 3. of the lore rules Non-canon fantasy creatures, such as fairies and demons, may not be roleplayed without Lore Master approval I wish the best of luck with this lore. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DruinsBane 240 Author Share Posted June 15, 2014 After speaking to Ritts about these kinds of creatures (not Wights in particular, but a lot of others as well), I have to state that for this creature to be played, you either have to make it become cannon lore (which might take a while) and then who plays one of those only has to follow the lore, or have an LM decide on individual aprovals of it (each player that wants to play one needs permission), which might be better or worse considering what you want done with this creature. They fall into rule 3. of the lore rules Non-canon fantasy creatures, such as fairies and demons, may not be roleplayed without Lore Master approval I wish the best of luck with this lore. If I may interject, Wights are not a new race or creature, nor should they be treated as such, they are by all means still their respective race, just some aesthetic alterations and re spawning at a chosen location. Similar to the arrangement of Ghouls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jistuma 1995 Share Posted June 16, 2014 If I may interject, Wights are not a new race or creature, nor should they be treated as such, they are by all means still their respective race, just some aesthetic alterations and re spawning at a chosen location. Similar to the arrangement of Ghouls. They have a different body do they not? If they do, they are a creature, not their respective race. If they don't... are you just gaining immortality for having a body that can't fight? A dead body? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swgrclan 2633 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Having your arm replaced by a crab's or having goat legs as a Wight (or even Ghoul, for that matter) does not validate the individual bearing these aesthetics as a "creature." Rule 3 of the lore rules doesn't actually say anything about attaching limbs to your body - and being able to use them - besides usable wings, which are dismissed in another rule. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jistuma 1995 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Having your arm replaced by a crab's or having goat legs as a Wight (or even Ghoul, for that matter) does not validate the individual bearing these aesthetics as a "creature." Rule 3 of the lore rules doesn't actually say anything about attaching limbs to your body - and being able to use them - besides usable wings, which are dismissed in another rule. So is it or not just a dead body? Also, a crab arm makes you a freak, goat legs makes you a creature of fantasy, thought it might still be acceptable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DruinsBane 240 Author Share Posted June 20, 2014 They have a different body do they not? If they do, they are a creature, not their respective race. If they don't... are you just gaining immortality for having a body that can't fight? A dead body? No, it's their original body. So is it or not just a dead body? Also, a crab arm makes you a freak, goat legs makes you a creature of fantasy, thought it might still be acceptable. That's easily debatable, and your example is a faun, or Pan as in the Greek god of the wild. The former being of birth, the latter being a god. This is going off-topic, and I'd rather not expand on this otherwise this will turn into *** for tat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jistuma 1995 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Then what are the changes? Are they just walking corpses that can do necromancy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DruinsBane 240 Author Share Posted June 20, 2014 Then what are the changes? Are they just walking corpses that can do necromancy? In a mechanical sense yes, in fact the only real difference is that of weaknesses imbued upon them from the transformation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sister Sequoia 438 Share Posted March 5, 2015 This lore has been denied. Conditions were presented and never met, and irregardless if something has been RP'd before, if it was never lore approved, this does not make it alright, and does not mean the lore is canon. Wights have fallen inactive in any event, if they are to be RP'd any further, adjust the lore and re-present it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByUniBearse.thumb.png.a4b527c03666cb1b844a73d69e6dd4b4.png)
Recommended Posts