[Amendment] Naztherak Disconnection

[PolarLoLs 984]

8 minutes ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

the zarrokul do not care about any particular individual or group infernal entity on aevos. To claim they’d uphold any particular individuals choice to DC by preventing them from reconnecting is a bit self centered. They do not care, so long as they have your soul and you do their work. The whole point is for warlocks and mortal plane bound Zar’akal to squabble and never rise against the pentacle, and therefore serve them.

 

your lore reasoning does not vibe with what Moz is basically

Arent the zarrokul supposed to be self centered?  them not letting some shitter use their magic after losing it would only make sense, only a select few should have the privilege of wielding their power in the first , to get disconnected and connect a second time just makes it seem like they give second chances which they shouldnt

[PrimnyaQuorum 3999]

44 minutes ago, PolarLoLs said:

Arent the zarrokul supposed to be self centered?  them not letting some shitter use their magic after losing it would only make sense, only a select few should have the privilege of wielding their power in the first , to get disconnected and connect a second time just makes it seem like they give second chances which they shouldnt

the pentacle are 5 paranoid dragons fighting one another but in a mutual way to assure they remain the top 5. They do not care what naz 1 does to naz 2, to the extent they would actively deny someone coming back for more (why would they turn down a chance for more soul juice?) naz lore starts with the fact the zarrokul prey on the losers and downtrodden explicitly. I think there should be nothing preventing someone from reconnecting but there should be a clear penalty for it happening repeatedly. I’m leaning rn towards either never can become an akal or a reduction in your maleus cap/inability to dedicate slots further.

[xo31 3979]

i dont play a naz nor do i know if this has been suggested since i just skipped to the last page to skip all of the arguing but like errr uhh

mystic has a disconnection ritual that cannot be reversed by anyone but wights. what if the naz disconnection ritual could only be reversed by zar'akal? something about the big evil demons trusting them. could also be an interesting avenue of 'absorbing' a coven rather than destroying them. 'serve me and get ur powers back' type shit. but what do i know. im just a chud ghost larper and voidcel

 

i also hate naz lore until someone teaches me it so i dont care at the end of the day besides the fact that more small shitter naz exist the more my wight can kill

[Panashea 3323]

7 hours ago, lemonke said:

I think we should all play druids. Dark magics suck anyways!

Shamanism* i will always accept more friends

[lemonke 6014]

20 minutes ago, Panashea said:

Shamanism* i will always accept more friends

OI OI OI!! STAY IN YOUR LANE!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JoshBright 3014]

14 hours ago, Unwillingly said:

- Requires five T5 Naztherak, or three Zar'akal and two T5 Naztherak

good change for any magic in my opinion, especially one that does not require OOC consent to disconnect.

 

that being said 

14 hours ago, Unwillingly said:

- A disconnected Naztherak may not reconnect to the magic whatsoever, it is a permanent defeat and testament of weakness in the eyes of the Rokul. 

 

14 hours ago, Unwillingly said:

- Does not give back the slots already given to the magic, these are permanently lost.

 

I see some problems with this, you can have 5 people go raid a smaller coven and force DC multiple people if they are able to capture them with no chance of redemption. not to mention this comes with the fact that it permanently locks out magic slots for that persona. 

 

On the other hand once more, you likely have groups connecting people just to combat for them, at the end of the day no one knows the correct answer as no matter how you slice the problem  it can be very tricky, you can swing the scales one way only for new problems to arise, perhaps a CD on the ritual might help from group hunting, but again, i do not know, it is a little bit of a situation like the paladins where you had certain players who other wanted to see disconnected and they went out of their way rightly or wrongly to do so, and you had some people being connected just to have numbers. You can also make this argument for most magic groups on the server, however those groups for the most part do not have a magic lock clause. 

 

 

8 hours ago, Astrophysical said:

Someone kicking a magic community’s hornet nest was on my endmap bingo.

ya mine too, expected it to happen sooner ngl 

[Frostdrop1 1843]

7 hours ago, kewsoh said:

Frostdrop1 actually illustrates the point perfectly through their own contradiction: "It's a little something called temptation??? The hells were already unforgiving when not returning anything." Exactly. So why would the Lords of Hell continue to empower someone whose soul is already promised to them, especially after they've proven themselves too weak to hold onto that power in the first place?

Considering this a contradiction means you didn't read it as intended because I am not presenting this viewpoint from the same standpoint that others here have been and fundamentally you've misunderstood. So here:

Because they're greedy.

The lords don't exactly have a pride or agenda to keep by witholding the magic. It's pretty much built on the premise of exploiting the weak. There is nothing to gain from permanent DCs other than losing out on that last little soul fragment and the chance to corrupt it. The souls, in essence, are only partly promised and gradually dealt through subsequent deals with the lord. That's the whole point of boons & banes/cursing. The character, instead, has everything to lose by keeping the chance open. They only fail to return the soul segments already claimed, tearing the soul forever. Any disconnected character has at least part of their own soul remaining.

[Demonica 678]

As a long time Naz player, I see no issue with this amendment. And if you do, it's probably because you're more attached to the magic itself than to the character you've made.

Getting a second chance with dark magic doesn't make any sense narratively. The magic should feel dangerous to possess and maintain, especially when you're on your own. That's why the lore emphasizes covens and the infernal climb so heavily. There's no tension or gravity in RP if you know your friend is going to reconnect you later on 

 

Also, I've never seen Unwilling not roleplay conflict in good faith. Accusing them of doing this for an OOC ploy is silly and sounds like cope lol  

[tantuni445 289]

🥀🙏🥀

[Werew0lf 24180]

2 hours ago, Unwillingly said:

I upped the cost of the disconnection rite, just seems like a reasonable move if disconnections would be made more punishing by this amendment. I'm also open to more unique magic interactions to similar nature of what xo suggested, though I'd like to see how this is initially received in LT feedback

Current Lore:
- Requires 5 Naztherak with two of them being T5 or 1 Zar’akal and 2 Naztherak.

New Lore: 
- Requires five T5 Naztherak, or three Zar'akal and two T5 Naztherak

I would keep it to the original 5 Naztherak with two of them being T-5.

 

You barely see disconnection be used anyways, and the requirements already seem strenuous (having 5 naz in one room lol!)

 

I think the amendment is fine. I would agree with @Frostdrop1somewhat in their concerns but also they gave my boyfriend @SethWolfcovid so I no longer agree with them.

 

 

[femurlord 3751]

I'll give you whats wrong with the Naz community, so much so, I support this amendment. Currently Naztherak suffer, as it's inherent and ontological evil nature is shifted by the current players. Majority are cursed children, elves, or adjacent, hellbent upon pursuing SOL RP or romance, such even extending to their demons. Who in roleplay are told, "babysit my children :3", "please serve me tea.". Naztherak will never truly prosper if people aren't willing to fulfill the archetype that comes with it. Warlocks and Witches, not baby mamas and widows/widowers.

[ScreamingDingo 20568]

this thread is my personal list for dcing naz thank you

[_AzureLexi 766]

Not currently a naz player just associated with some but.

Has the two-strike disconnect chance actually caused any problems..? Or is this patching over something that doesn't exist.

 

I agree with @xo31that changing reconnection to have more flavor and expectation is better than just making it... not exist. Add more "deal with the devil" roleplay to the "deal with the devil" magic 🙏 

(Or make reconnection give more malices. Or anything idk. I just don't personally see what making reconnection impossible adds to roleplay.)

[JustMeMorgan 2065]

18 hours ago, lemonke said:

I think the issue is that this ritual has indeed no requirements. You could do it as "Yeah, my character hates other Naz, so I want to DC them" or "Naz are about betrayal! So I want to DC." I understand; that's the nature of the magic. Yet, you are giving too much power to a ritual that's spread around a lot, to permanently and effectively remove at least 4 slots and permanently scar a character. I think the ritual is fine with a strike system; some magics don't even have such mysticism, nor do I think this change will improve anything.

 

And I know DC rituals are needed, trust me. Look at necromancy LOL. But you have to be careful because this dc stuff is on the hands of many.

 

"Omg guys I just hit T4!!! I spent like 6 irl months getting to this point and several weeks of in character lessons and development!!!"

*other player comes over and removes it the next day*

[wowj 9747]

Should make disconnections easier, destroy everybody, none shall wield magic but I.

(didnt read this amendment)