Panashea 2644 Share Posted November 11, 2022 On 11/9/2022 at 8:29 AM, The King Of The Moon said: The same is true for many other misconceptions you seem to have relating to underuse of the language, 'cliques' and so on; whilst it may not be a revolutionary piece (nor does it intend to be) it is a net improvement on all of the aforementioned fronts. Ultimately from my perspective a lot of your critiques boil down to wanting a worldlore piece addressing things only loosely related by what this piece intends based off of precedent (genus, soul lore, Ixris and so on)... And whilst those concerns have a place, they aren't really all too relevant to what this piece was written to achieve, nor could the issues you envision be in any way worsened by this piece's implementation. There was no misconception, I linked you the lore citations highlighting the contradicting lore. You describe it as a "net improvement", but this piece only serves to give this playerbase extra genus(a magical resource that only serves mechanical advantage) and forces them to learn a deific magic or give their soul to Ixris. The language aspect forces them to find a Naztherak or Zar'ei, which is the same point I've been reiterating about this submission not being substantial and encouraging clique behavior. Other then the mechanical advantage this submission is boiled down to: join a deific/magic group or join a dark group. Every player already has that choice. If they're exactly like descendants then why do they need extra features beyond the aesthetic? On 11/9/2022 at 8:29 AM, The King Of The Moon said: I am confident that the interactions with said pieces listed here are consistent with canon. Something that I have ratified with by consulting two loremasters on the topic, one of whom is currently behind Ixris' presence in-game since my departure from the ST. There is no consistent canon visible to the current public of when Ixris was formed, when and who made Al'tahrn-Durngo, how Ixris' involvement or creation affects the Aengudaemonic pantheon and similar entities who would be opposed to their inception or its involvement. This piece makes that more confusing. Adding more confusion to already vague and contradictory backfacing lore is a bad precedent to continually make on Ixris lore. Aforementioned staff doesn't really make me feel any better when this piece exposes more holes. You described screenshots as a strawman. Why would cursed children be able to learn deific magic when they're permanently marked by something beyond the evils that normally restrict magic? What happens to this mark when they become CAs? How does this mark effect extra-planar travel? How is this mark unable to be seen by deities and extra-planar creatures? If this is something so benign that deities and similar creatures willing to accept it, why does it give extra genus? If Ixris has marked these beings for consumption why would deities keep them within their respective realms instead of destroying them? How would something so mundane be unable to be removed in life? What about this submission is more compelling then the choice every other player has about the forces of good an evil? Simply adding "more" to a hastily written submission does not validate that submission's existence. Currently it just feels like a lot of glaring problems are being pushed further down the road. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
squakhawk 7867 Share Posted April 13, 2023 This Lore has been accepted. Moved to Implemented Lore, it will be sorted to it's appropriate category soon. Please note that if this is playable lore, such as a magic or CA, you will need to write a guide for this piece. You will be contacted regarding the guide (or implementation if it isn’t needed) shortly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts