Your View: TA changes.

[Song Druid 1486]

What?  There was no need whatsoever.  You are on the outside and have no experience or insight to offer as to our efficiency or inner workings.  Same with the MAT.   In the spirit of Thanksgiving, kindof like the English Settlers seeing the "uncivilized" Native Americans and deciding they needed a nice change of pace.

 

 

[Gone 869]

This new rules is dumb and no one likes it, not even staff as shown by this thread. Can we remove it already before it starts doing damage and making the cliques stronger? And give a long stare at whoever came up with it in the first place? 

Considering the fact that it is YOU the player that creates these cliques even BEFORE this system was in place you could have simply done something against it before MAT felt the need to step in. Because of player X being sheltered and not spreading their teachings thet put themselves in this situation. 

I've never made a clique? 

And please explain to me how this 'rule' would help spread teachings. Tell me how having LESS teachers in a magic could ever possibly beat cliques and help spread things around. Go ahead, I'm waiting. 

[GodEmperorFlam 3447]

This new rules is dumb and no one likes it, not even staff as shown by this thread. Can we remove it already before it starts doing damage and making the cliques stronger? And give a long stare at whoever came up with it in the first place? 

Considering the fact that it is YOU the player that creates these cliques even BEFORE this system was in place you could have simply done something against it before MAT felt the need to step in. Because of player X being sheltered and not spreading their teachings thet put themselves in this situation. 

I like your passion about breaking up cliques and the whole notion that people should devote themselves to a magic or two instead of five. However, I have this nagging notion you don't know what you're babbling about after reading the comments you posted on this thread so far nor do you see the impact this rule will have. You preach about how the players need to do something when it's only a few bad apples that are safe-guarding a few magics. A vast majority of magic users are not involved with the few remaining cliques and can't do anything to prevent them.

 

The problem is, this rule has nothing to do with getting people in cliques to teach/spread their magic. In my opinion, if someone gets a TA, they should be actively using it to teach people instead of just holding onto it. If the MAT actually wanted to break cliques up, they'd force people in said cliques to spread their magic. Or implement a way for the magics to spread. Limiting TAs =/= people getting taught or breaking cliques apart.

[AlmondTree 418]

This new rules is dumb and no one likes it, not even staff as shown by this thread. Can we remove it already before it starts doing damage and making the cliques stronger? And give a long stare at whoever came up with it in the first place? 

Considering the fact that it is YOU the player that creates these cliques even BEFORE this system was in place you could have simply done something against it before MAT felt the need to step in. Because of player X being sheltered and not spreading their teachings thet put themselves in this situation. 

I've never made a clique? 

And please explain to me how this 'rule' would help spread teachings. Tell me how having LESS teachers in a magic could ever possibly beat cliques and help spread things around. Go ahead, I'm waiting. 

It was an example? YOU the player.. Anyways, limiting it to two Ta's will simply make it so that the cliques have to make more teachers and therefore you get MORE teachers. There, your wait is over.

 

This new rules is dumb and no one likes it, not even staff as shown by this thread. Can we remove it already before it starts doing damage and making the cliques stronger? And give a long stare at whoever came up with it in the first place? 

Considering the fact that it is YOU the player that creates these cliques even BEFORE this system was in place you could have simply done something against it before MAT felt the need to step in. Because of player X being sheltered and not spreading their teachings thet put themselves in this situation. 

I like your passion about breaking up cliques and the whole notion that people should devote themselves to a magic or two instead of five. However, I have this nagging notion you don't know what you're babbling about after reading the comments you posted on this thread so far nor do you see the impact this rule will have. You preach about how the players need to do something when it's only a few bad apples that are safe-guarding a few magics. A vast majority of magic users are not involved with the few remaining cliques and can't do anything to prevent them.

 

The problem is, this rule has nothing to do with getting people in cliques to teach/spread their magic. In my opinion, if someone gets a TA, they should be actively using it to teach people instead of just holding onto it. If the MAT actually wanted to break cliques up, they'd force people in said cliques to spread their magic. Or implement a way for the magics to spread. Limiting TAs =/= people getting taught or breaking cliques apart.

What i said above: "Limiting it to two Ta's will simply make it so that the cliques have to make more teachers and therefore you get MORE teachers." or else their magic is subject for removal if they don't spread it. Not really going to argue more than how I see it.

[GodEmperorFlam 3447]

This new rules is dumb and no one likes it, not even staff as shown by this thread. Can we remove it already before it starts doing damage and making the cliques stronger? And give a long stare at whoever came up with it in the first place? 

Considering the fact that it is YOU the player that creates these cliques even BEFORE this system was in place you could have simply done something against it before MAT felt the need to step in. Because of player X being sheltered and not spreading their teachings thet put themselves in this situation. 

I've never made a clique? 

And please explain to me how this 'rule' would help spread teachings. Tell me how having LESS teachers in a magic could ever possibly beat cliques and help spread things around. Go ahead, I'm waiting. 

It was an example? YOU the player.. Anyways, limiting it to two Ta's will simply make it so that the cliques have to make more teachers and therefore you get MORE teachers. There, your wait is over.

 

This new rules is dumb and no one likes it, not even staff as shown by this thread. Can we remove it already before it starts doing damage and making the cliques stronger? And give a long stare at whoever came up with it in the first place? 

Considering the fact that it is YOU the player that creates these cliques even BEFORE this system was in place you could have simply done something against it before MAT felt the need to step in. Because of player X being sheltered and not spreading their teachings thet put themselves in this situation. 

I like your passion about breaking up cliques and the whole notion that people should devote themselves to a magic or two instead of five. However, I have this nagging notion you don't know what you're babbling about after reading the comments you posted on this thread so far nor do you see the impact this rule will have. You preach about how the players need to do something when it's only a few bad apples that are safe-guarding a few magics. A vast majority of magic users are not involved with the few remaining cliques and can't do anything to prevent them.

 

The problem is, this rule has nothing to do with getting people in cliques to teach/spread their magic. In my opinion, if someone gets a TA, they should be actively using it to teach people instead of just holding onto it. If the MAT actually wanted to break cliques up, they'd force people in said cliques to spread their magic. Or implement a way for the magics to spread. Limiting TAs =/= people getting taught or breaking cliques apart.

What i said above: "Limiting it to two Ta's will simply make it so that the cliques have to make more teachers and therefore you get MORE teachers." or else their magic is subject for removal if they don't spread it. Not really going to argue more than how I see it.

Well, to begin with, their magic won't be removed if they have a sizable amount of people within it. Magic is hardly ever removed and it took years of stagnation for ascended/contract/arcane to be removed. 

 

But back on topic, let's assume that this actually does make those within cliques get TAs, what's forcing them to actually spread the magic? Necromancy has almost as many teachers as it does people with MAs within it, yet they hardly ever take on students. It's rather stagnant, but from the amount of people in it it can be considered active. Just because people have TAs does not mean that people are being taught. And what's the stop the current cliques from only spreading the magic within their group?

 

I don't believe this will cause people in cliques to get TAs. Instead, seeing as how the circlejerked magics are hoarded as you pointed out previously, the people in the cliques will simply give up their TAs in the more common magics to retain control on the circlejerked magic. This reduces the more accessible magics from being spread as well as letting the cliques keep their grasp on the magic.

 

I'm all for breaking these groups up and letting their magics spread, but this rule isn't the way to go about doing it. The number of TAs isn't what we should be focusing on, but instead our sight should be on the people with TAs that aren't teaching others. Implement rules that require for them to actually teach and spread the magic, then you'll see cliques disappear over time.

[Mephistophelian 977]

Wait...

 

If the MAT truly wanted to break cliques, wouldn't they allow self teaching to be more lenient? I don't like the idea at all, don't get me wrong on that, but wouldn't that make it easier to break cliques than this, which would effectively form more (if at all)?

[Song Druid 1486]

Fun fact!  Before the existence of the MAT Druidism was almost entirely self taught save for healing and the first few lessons!

[Wendigo 786]

These new changes are pointless and will hurt the community. By limiting TAs you are limiting the exposure of numerous teachers to the player base. This will not solve the issue, and will only make people hold onto their more important TAs which in turn will cause more of the issue you are trying to solve.

[DISCOLIQUID 2702]

Alright, it's been two days since I made this post, and I'd like to share my own opinions now, as many of the other MAT members have.

 

I don't think this is going to reduce clique sizes. What I think this will do is shrink the magical community and make it more difficult for people to learn what they want to learn in role-play. Many others have also stated my opinions, such as advocating the return of simplistic self-teaching. 

 

With that said, I appreciate the amount of opinions posted here, and I am reading through as many as I can.

[Song Druid 1486]

If I may ask, if several MAT members are against this, exactly why is this a thing?  Is there a singular person on the team with more power than the rest that believes it should be a certain way?  I'm concerned about the effectiveness of a team that enforces the will of a few if the majority (as I've been told) feel differently.

[GodEmperorFlam 3447]

If I may ask, if several MAT members are against this, exactly why is this a thing?  Is there a singular person on the team with more power than the rest that believes it should be a certain way?  I'm concerned about the effectiveness of a team that enforces the will of a few if the majority (as I've been told) feel differently.

From what I've gathered, it's mainly slic3 that chose to implement it (so far I haven't come across a single MAT member aside from him who agrees this is a good decision). And there's no admin head to keep him in check, so stuff like this happens. I'd suggest creating some sort of system within the MAT to keep decisions like this from becoming official, otherwise I foresee us regressing back to a time when magic was stifled and couldn't grow, which created a sense of elitism among those who could do magic.

[E__V__O 2000]

How about we impliment a system where. You make a POLL or a survey to see what people agree with or not... Such as how we made PvP default where it was almost a 50/50 vote. 

 

At least that was fair.

[Stag 3230]

I have been saying that if you just make it so it's 2 archetypes that can be taught in instead of subtypes it basically solves everything. So a druid can teach anything in the druidism archetype. A mage might pick Evocation and The Necro-corruption archetype. That is 12 magics that you can teach. I don't believe that a single player should be teaching an incredibly wide variety of magics but it also shouldn't be so restricted. When magic was made free in the Fringe it inflated the magical roleplay we see on the server and the problem we had with magic not being magical multiplied. Restrictions seem harsh but giving players free access to everything is spoiling them. We don't need everyone to be chubby little kiddies. You have to give something for players to progress for. If it's too easy they lose interest. If it's too hard they give up.

 

 My proposed Archetype breakdown:

-         Muun’trivazja  ( 3 Subtypes )

-         Clerical ( 2 Subtypes )

-         Monk Magic ( 1 Subtype )

-         Druidism ( 4 Subtypes )

-         Shamanism ( 5 Subtpyes )

-         Necromancy, Blood Magic, Mysticism, Shade ( 4 Subtypes )

-         Frost Witch ( 1 Subtype )

-         Fi ( 2 Subtypes )

-         Soul Puppetry ( 1 Subtype )

-         Alteration, illusion ( 7 Subtypes, 9-10 if you count everything transfiguration does )

-         Evocation ( 8 Subtypes )

-         Golemancy, Runesmithing ( 2 Subtypes )

[Wolf Druid Ouity 1461]

I have a very hard time seeing how this is a positive change for the server.

I'm gonna call it like it is- someone was spitballing in the MAT chat about ways to ruin lives, and someone threw this into the pot. You lot (or rather more likely, one GM and a suck up or two) said "well, it's a thing and we can do it, and it sounds like it makes sense." So here we are.

 

I really don't think this is a good plan. If we are already limited in what we can learn, we are already limited in what we can teach.

 

I'll use my character as example, because there are others in similar circumstances. We have a situation where a character has spent his entire lifetime, and then five more, in the Druidic Order. He doesn't know anything else besides Druidism. He is the peak of what a Druid can do, and in the very top echelon of all the magic users in the known world. Realistically, why would he be unable to teach any part of his craft? I, a 19 year old dude, have the capacity to talk out any branch of Druidism easily enough that some random across the table can comprehend it. Why would a 430 year old borderline mythical being not be able to do the same to a Druid who is already trained in the topic of discussion?

 

I just don't see the logic- and more importantly I have not seen or been aware of any conflict or issue that would make this a positive change. As far as I know, nobody was particularly distressed about people "teaching too much" or anything of that nature, so I'm not sure why this was even decided on except because the people voting (or again, some GM or Admin power tripping) decided that it seemed like a good idea. The MAT's job is to regulate- I get that. Don't fish for problems that aren't there.

 

I'll go a step further and say this: Literally nobody on this thread thinks this is a good idea. Maybe a couple resounding "mehs" but the rest of us are not for this. Please do not overpower all of us with your authority just because you can, and let the majority decide for once.

Edited November 27, 2015 by Wolf Druid Ouity

[hellfiazz 879]

All the subtypes of evocation, Druidism, shamanism and Muun'trivazja are functionally identical in their mechanism. There are others I'm sure. There is no RP grounds for this limit.

Limiting the amount of teachers will not break up cliques or spread magic, how can it possibly do so when people become less able to actually teach. There is no OOC grounds for this limit.