Your View: New Magic Rules (Vote!)

[Katherine1 362]

I really don't understand the purpose of the limited teaching rules. As one of the teachers for one of the magics given leniency, I still don't see the purpose of the rule in general. It's been said it's been made to break up cliques, but this only reduces the number of teachers for any given subtype of magic. You might say "But they need to make more teachers to keep teaching the magic!" But it doesn't work like that. The people who want to teach will teach, and by limiting what they can teach, you're limiting the number of teachers you can have. If your concern was breaking up cliques, then shouldn't you be making TA's easier to get instead of limiting the number that someone who wants to teach can have?

Is there a rationale aside from breaking up cliques? 

[luv 3469]

I really don't understand the purpose of the limited teaching rules. As one of the teachers for one of the magics given leniency, I still don't see the purpose of the rule in general. It's been said it's been made to break up cliques, but this only reduces the number of teachers for any given subtype of magic. You might say "But they need to make more teachers to keep teaching the magic!" But it doesn't work like that. The people who want to teach will teach, and by limiting what they can teach, you're limiting the number of teachers you can have. If your concern was breaking up cliques, then shouldn't you be making TA's easier to get instead of limiting the number that someone who wants to teach can have?

Is there a rationale aside from breaking up cliques? 

I don't believe there was any other reason in all honesty, I don't see one when I read it. 

[GDPR 014 48]

Teachers are going to want to put their strongest magic (usually offensive) up for teaching, leaving their cooler/creative ones and utilities on the burner. There are some cool utility magics(mental magic, void translo, etc) and I really don't want to see said magics get screwed due to lack of students because there are no teachers. In essence, r1p magic.

[The Fact Core 511]

Excuse me? But I thought the MAT was supposed to just write down who is mage etc. Not returning back to the old MAT that got removed! Because it looks like that more and more "Nopes" are given out, restrictions everywhere.

[luv 3469]

Excuse me? But I thought the MAT was supposed to just write down who is mage etc. Not returning back to the old MAT that got removed! Because it looks like that more and more "Nopes" are given out, restrictions everywhere.

^

[Sky 0]

Before us we see history repeating itself, the wheel turning.

[Eranikus 348]

Everything I can say has been said by people already on this thread, but I'll go ahead and reiterate.

These new rules, not just the TA limit, aren't helping the magic problem with LotC. If anything it feels like its trying to force people to drop specific magics so they can be removed like Arcane Puppetry and Contract magic were. That's my genuine opinion. After the post about the magic plugin, then the removal of a few magics that wouldn't have even needed anything from the plugin, and now the limiting of how many TAs you can have of the magics you can learn, its feeling more and more to me like the magics that don't get enough TAs active or don't have enough people to learn them are going to get scrapped, limiting the rp available on the server. This is the exact problem you were trying to solve, right? Broadening rp for people? Giving them more options? Then why limit the options of the ones that can spread the knowledge?

Tin foil hats aside, its pretty clear given the amount of resistance that this rule is encountering that it isn't needed. Heads need to be removed from posteriors.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

Seems like a very one-sided issue to me. I would like to see this rule un-done.

[Archbishop 1784]

To be honest, while I do agree and have voted for it to be removed. This thread will not overturn the decision because this is not just something people can ignore as with what happened with Villain applications.

[Dizzy771 900]

Making it more official. Thread moved to the "Your View" subforum. I'll try and make sure the results are given to the MAT and more thought is given towards the rule. 

[Merkaken 516]

I don't really understand or see how this would remove cliques... If anything, it would be worse. If you can only have two students,  who is the teacher going to chose to be his students? His friends/people he is in another group with, or someone he doesn't know? I honestly don't see how this could possibly remove cliques. Please change this.

Edited December 4, 2015 by Merkaken

[Anderssn 1115]

I want magic to be a rare and mystical thing, odd to the average men and women. 

[KarmaDelta 969]

Someone has been reading/watching too much Star Wars.

[luv 3469]

I want magic to be a rare and mystical thing, odd to the average men and women. 

Little late for that, magic is a pretty popular thing for some of the players who have been on for a month or two.

[hellfiazz 879]

Fewer teachers means fewer students means more magical elitism means more cliques, more collectors, and more braggarts.