WOWJ 2724 Share Posted February 20, 2023 Hello there wowj here, this was discussed in the LoTC Lore Discord and I believe it to be a needed addition to the Atronach Body redline section of the Atronach Lorepiece. A Simple Addition to this lore would be follows: All Atronach cores must be ST-Signed and given the Significant Lore Item tag. Upon the destruction of an Atronach Core, the Atronach would completely lose of all personality and memory if it was rebuilt. This does not require a new Creature-Application. I'll be quite honest I'm unsure as to why this isn't a thing currently - If golems need their Cores ST Signed, and need for a mechanical item, why don't Atronachs? There's no way to check if an Atronach Forger did the proper RP for it!!! Creation Mechanics Spoiler Creation Mechanics The creation of an atronach is a long, though freeform, process that takes several OOC days of preparation to perform. An atronach forger must collect the core materials, the plate materials, and have a mana obelisk ready for use - though the last step is optional, it is highly recommended. In order to create the core one must take a mana gem and encase it within arcaurum and then have the evocation bound to it with transfiguration and Atronach Forging. Extra limbs will result in a proportionate loss of strength. Adding 2 extra arms results in all 4 of them being 1/2 as strong as normal, and so on. The plates can be made of any metal that does not contradict the atronach’s element. All Atronach cores must be ST-Signed and given the Significant Lore Item tag. Upon the destruction of an Atronach Core, the Atronach would completely lose of all personality and memory if it were rebuilt. This does not require a new CA. 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Etan 2837 Share Posted February 20, 2023 Why would you need an ST signed item when an Atronach is a CA accepted race already indicating the ST's approval. It's red tape on red tape. Can you explain your reasoning a bit more than "Well if X has it Y should."? 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOWJ 2724 Author Share Posted February 20, 2023 25 minutes ago, Etan said: Can you explain your reasoning a bit more than "Well if X has it Y should."? no 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Etan 2837 Share Posted February 20, 2023 Just now, wowj said: no A riveting and moving reply. I can't help but agree now. 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxury 601 Share Posted February 20, 2023 The discussion in question was maybe 5-6 total lines of discourse between two or three players over the course of 30 minutes, and did not at all seem conclusive! With that in mind, if the underlying issue is the quantity of Atronachs being created - Advocate for a hard cap on # per player. Something like that seems easier to track and handle, as ST do not need more /sreq tickets on their plate. Alternatively, if it is found to be a specific player the option remains for a ST member to approach them privately. Not every minor issue needs hard rules and red tape to apply across the entirety of a feat/magic. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Privet 1840 Share Posted February 20, 2023 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Etan said: Can you explain your reasoning a bit more than "Well if X has it Y should."? Considering atronachs are definitely more abuseable than golems it's not unreasonable to suggest such a thing, they are CA creatures so they should be given an ST approved item on acceptance (as other CAs, like darkstalkers, have items given to their creator upon acceptance), it's only one more process to go through so it should either be removed for golems or added on to atronachs. Also, isn't there an amendment for atronach eyes with this exact reasoning for it's purpose? Edited February 20, 2023 by Privet 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Etan 2837 Share Posted February 20, 2023 3 minutes ago, Privet said: Considering atronachs are definitely more abuseable that golems it's not unreasonable to suggest such a thing, they are CA creatures so they should be given an ST approved item on acceptance (as other CAs, like darkstalkers, have items given to their creator upon acceptance), it's only one more process to go through so it should either be removed for golems or added on to atronachs. Also, isn't there an amendment for atronach eyes with this exact reasoning for it's purpose? Why add more red tape when we should actually be advocating for the removal of red tape for the other lores then? Cause having to have an item for a CA that is already ST approved is silly.. and we all know how long it takes our Lore Team to sign literally anything. Maybe this post should be an amendment to remove it for golems! 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Privet 1840 Share Posted February 20, 2023 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Etan said: and we all know how long it takes our Lore Team to sign literally anything. Maybe this post should be an amendment to remove it for golems! I believe we should whip staff members to actually work, or they should be removed. Spoiler Kill lorebrains. Behead lorebrains. Roundhouse kick a lorebrain into the concrete. Slam dunk a lorebrain baby into the trashcan. Crucify filthy lorebrains. Defecate in a lorebrain's food. Launch lorebrains into the sun. Stir fry lorebrains in a wok. Toss lorebrains into active volcanoes. Urinate into a lorebrain's gas tank. Judo throw lorebrains into a wood chipper. Twist lorebrain heads off. Report lorebrains to the IRS. Karate chop lorebrains in half. Trap lorebrains in quicksand. Crush lorebrains in a hydraulic press for a YouTube video. Liquefy lorebrains in a vat of acid. Eat lorebrains. Dissect lorebrains. Stomp lorebrain skulls with steel toed boots. Cremate lorebrains in the oven. Lobotomize lorebrains. Grind lorebrains in the garbage disposal. Vaporize lorebrains with a ray gun. Kick old lorebrains down the stairs. Feed lorebrains to alligators. Slice lorebrains with a katana. Edited February 20, 2023 by Privet 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECS1999 938 Share Posted February 20, 2023 34 minutes ago, Privet said: Also, isn't there an amendment for atronach eyes with this exact reasoning for it's purpose? The Atronach Eyes have more lore and flavour involved than just giving an ST item to atronachs. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeSmoothie 4852 Share Posted February 20, 2023 45 minutes ago, Luxury said: The discussion in question was maybe 5-6 total lines of discourse between two or three players over the course of 30 minutes, and did not at all seem conclusive! With that in mind, if the underlying issue is the quantity of Atronachs being created - Advocate for a hard cap on # per player. Something like that seems easier to track and handle, as ST do not need more /sreq tickets on their plate. Alternatively, if it is found to be a specific player the option remains for a ST member to approach them privately. Not every minor issue needs hard rules and red tape to apply across the entirety of a feat/magic. +1 this not sure how I feel abt cores 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeteorDragon 2794 Share Posted February 20, 2023 47 minutes ago, Luxury said: Advocate for a hard cap on # per player. I think it should work like how Sorvians go. I think golems are also getting this in the new write, but I'm not sure 3 CA Atronachs per 3 OOC months 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannamannaa 1626 Share Posted February 20, 2023 On one hand, There does appear to be a discrepancy that should be addressed. On another, The idea of adding more red tape for volunteer staff and players alike seems unpalatable to many here. As mentioned above maybe golems shouldn't need an ST item? Less OOC hassle = more RP. 1 minute ago, MeteorDragon said: I think it should work like how Sorvians go. I think golems are also getting this in the new write, but I'm not sure 3 CA Atronachs per 3 OOC months Sounds good as long as there is a way to address absentee Atronach players that drop the character. shouldn't punish one player if another leaves the server. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valannor 6344 Share Posted February 20, 2023 the true solution is to put all atronachs on a PK clause, as all other constructs are. True balance. 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
E__V__O 1984 Share Posted February 20, 2023 Atronach drones would also have this restriction or no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tasty_cheesecake 915 Share Posted February 20, 2023 oh noooo! i cant make my epic atronoch army so i can walk into town with 4 voidal poopslaves to beat up my enemies that my noodle arms are too weak to handle! voidcells seething over animiichads 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts