Unattunement is Flawed

[lemonke 6014]

I think Paniczealot is trying to say that he might be ok with chaos rituals, but there should be a BASE on it. The fact that it can be simply "You are x race, I don't like you" and get dced over druidism or similar magics is a bit silly, or as I said, a bigger nation demanding a disconnection that have nothing to do with y magic.

 

For the vaporwave or whatever situation, I can say I'm not really happy about it. I'd say, if it was done on another DAY and if the character wasn't killed, that would have been better. I just think that disconnecting someone, then getting their magical limb destroyed, and then killing them is a waste of time and roleplay. You didn't make druidism better or resolve any issue, because, at that point, you quite literally gave a "**** you" OOC, or at least it could be interpreted so, perhaps not in this situation. That's it. It can feel personal for some.

 

It's like. Ok, she gets dced, I get it, but then you add all the rest atop of it, which could make sense on an IC projective ig, but like… why? At that point, you don't even offer character development to the disconnected individual; they can't remember what happened. It's a bit messed up, as not only did they waste months of magic progression, but they can't roleplay it out??

 

"I woke up without my magic, huh?" It's just bad and offers no growth, no conflict.

 

 

[PrimnyaQuorum 3999]

God dont care!!!

 

I don’t know what your on about frankly druids have THE most forgiving DC system. Gut reaction changing lore is how you end up like Naztherak.

 

At the end of the day your either allegeding there was OOC involved which it is then nothing to do with lore or RP, or it was RP based and your upset. Theres nothing wrong with being upset, but there is something wrong with reactionary demands to change lore.

[Tav 4336]

7 minutes ago, lemonke said:

I think Paniczealot is trying to say that he might be ok with chaos rituals, but there should be a BASE on it. The fact that it can be simply "You are x race, I don't like you" and get dced over druidism or similar magics is a bit silly, or as I said, a bigger nation demanding a disconnection who have nothing to do with y magic.

 

For the vaporwave or whatever situation, I can say I'm not really happy about it. I'd say, if it was done on another DAY and if the character wasn't killed, that would have been better. I just think that disconnecting someone, then getting their magical limb destroyed, and then killing them is a waste of time and roleplay. You didn't make druidism better or resolve any issue, because, at that point, you quite literally gave a "**** you" OOC, or at least it could be interpreted so, perhaps not in this situation. That's it. It can feel personal for some.

 

It's like. Ok, she gets dced, I get it, but then you add all the rest atop of it, which could make sense, but like… why? At that point, you don't even offer character development to the disconnected individual; they can't remember what happened. It's a bit messed up, as not only did they waste months of magic progression, but they can't roleplay it out??

 

"I woke up without my magic, huh?" It's just bad and offers no growth, no conflict.

 

 

destroying her limb was so that she didn't run away when she was getting disconnected, firstly. secondly, i believe her being killed was a circumstance left to roleplay; she was asked to explain herself, and i assume it was done horribly, so for that she was executed. also in roleplay you'd think the person you killed would stay dead, disconnecting her is so that she doesn't have a peaceful afterlife in the forest. it's awkward to be like "well. even if we kill her. the monks might bring her back." 

[Benleft 2579]

Tenet DC can (emphasis on can) enable report wars & rules baiting that makes it very easy to turn staff into a cudgel AGAINST players, rather than janitors that clean up poop & sign your items. Losing the paper slip titled MA/FA/CA to another player can sting, but it doesn’t “undo” RP that happened. 
 

It’s important that players are allowed to be wrong, too. 

[Areon 947]

Chaos DC followed by immediate killing of said character is the real problem and goes against the spirit of "monk revival" for what ultimately boils down to OOC shenanigans.

[lemonke 6014]

11 minutes ago, Tav said:

destroying her limb was so that she didn't run away when she was getting disconnected, firstly. secondly, i believe her being killed was a circumstance left to roleplay; she was asked to explain herself, and i assume it was done horribly, so for that she was executed. also in roleplay you'd think the person you killed would stay dead, disconnecting her is so that she doesn't have a peaceful afterlife in the forest. it's awkward to be like "well. even if we kill her. the monks might bring her back." 

Yeah, I see your point, and it's why I said "it might make sense." But it's not really roleplay-friendly; I always take into account that there is a person behind the screen and if my action is truly worth it. I understand; it's a very cringeworthy way for someone to approach RP this way.

 

But unless x individual is a freak, I just think the killing was not necessary. I got you—your character is not really the good type and wanted to kill her off, not to make her go to the druid realm stuff, but as I said, I just think it doesn't build anything, and unless the person pks. It is just a big nothing burger with a bit of drama.

 

I think the need is done at this point. Right now, I was just informed more about what she actually did rply and how she was caught. So, I'm less against it per se (if you get some DMs of me being against the RP, it was the heat of the moment LOL, I'm a bit passionate when it comes to defend people). SO, I apologize for that and I see how she deserved it, but I'll remain firm that I don't enjoy the afterwards killing, but for personal reasons anyway. You shouldn't be forced to RP your character differently because someone says so OOC, so it's not my right to be a justicar about it.

[PanicZealot 648]

21 minutes ago, PrimnyaQuorum said:

God dont care!!!

 

I don’t know what your on about frankly druids have THE most forgiving DC system. Gut reaction changing lore is how you end up like Naztherak.

 

At the end of the day your either allegeding there was OOC involved which it is then nothing to do with lore or RP, or it was RP based and your upset. Theres nothing wrong with being upset, but there is something wrong with reactionary demands to change lore.

Not asking lore be changed. Asking for insight. 

[spaazmatism 1018]

chaos dc is generally not an issue and though it does suck to lose a character, it sucks FAR WORSE to not be able to remove problematic players from ur community, because that suckage affects the whole community

[NightOfTheWind 3226]

8 hours ago, PanicZealot said:

Why in any version of the lore should Druidic unattunement be able to be done WITHOUT OOC consent, let alone without Mod/Story supervision?

 

Please keep in mind that from a narrative perspective, it makes sense that unattunement doesn't require OOC consent. A Druid's job is to protect nature in the name of the aspects. If a Druid was really doing something counter-intuitive to this cause, and was caught for it, do you think the Druid would consent to getting unattuned? In most cases, I do not think so. Imagine making a whole plan, getting a bunch of guys to help you out, and finally getting to the Druid only for them to say 'umm no i don't consent'.

So now you have a Druid roaming around doing something that the Aspects would hate. Now if you were the one trying to disconnect them, what would you do? You'd attempt to end their life in the name of the Aspects, correct? Well, that's where it gets complicated. If the attuned Druid PKs, they just go to the Eternal Forest. From a Druid's perspective, someone who has done something worthy of unattunement should never go near the Eternal Forest (the realm where druids go when they die). 

 

8 hours ago, PanicZealot said:

Shamanism, for example, REQUIRES actual screenshots proving that there have been actions committed that are grounds for disconnection; even then, a shaman is given THREE strikes. Templarism requires OOC agreement between BOTH parties to duel in some way and the loser CAN be disconnected. Paladins were similar in this way that they had strict tenets to uphold. Heck, even Seers have to abide by strict tenets.

 

Just because something is different and looser with their restrictions doesn't mean it's flawed by default. Of course Druid-Unattunement rituals can be improved upon in some areas, all systems on LoTC can. I think that's up to those who know the lore the best (Druid Community) to sort that out though after hopefully reading your input. 

 

8 hours ago, PanicZealot said:

While yes, Druids and their magic have tenets to follow, this DOES NOT, and CANNOT stop Druids from going around and disconnecting other Druids willy-nilly as they see fit. So explain to me HOW THAT MAKES SENSE?

 

If you're talking about the instance of disconnection that happened recently (apologies if I'm mistaken on this but the timing lines up), allegedly that disconnection was deserved. I won't speak more of it since it's not my business though, and I don't know a lot about it. I think writing your words like this makes it seem like what happened recently was done 'for no reason', which it wasn't. Moreover, whilst Druids may have the capacity to disconnect each other 'willy-nilly', I don't think I've seen any of them try to do that without a reason that directly ties to their narrative of being a Druid, which again, isn't that a good thing?

 

8 hours ago, PanicZealot said:

I have heard many stories and even seen people go through what they consider to be wrongful disconnection many times.

 

No matter who you are, what you play, how good of a player you are, if you're suddenly disconnected from your magic (unless it was planned RP) you're more than likely going to have a problem with it. But the question you should be asking is whether or not they deserved it from a nonbiased standpoint.

 

8 hours ago, PanicZealot said:

Is this fair? Is this right? What say you?

 

tl;dr LoTC Druid unattunement is fine in my opinion. It can be improved upon, sure, anything on LoTC can I'm sure, but it's not the evil tool some people think it is.

[Wand 1220]

19 minutes ago, Benleft said:

Tenet DC can (emphasis on can) enable report wars & rules baiting that makes it very easy to turn staff into a cudgel AGAINST players, rather than janitors that clean up poop & sign your items. Losing the paper slip titled MA/FA/CA to another player can sting, but it doesn’t “undo” RP that happened. 
 

It’s important that players are allowed to be wrong, too. 

 

Yeah this is what happened back when tenet based was more common, a lot more rules lawyering, generally unpleasant ooc interactions, and the disconnection wars or worse 'orbital disconnections' where staff just had to dc you because you broke tenets and were avoiding the roleplay of being found for disconnection by avoiding said players or, again, loopholes involved with the tenets

 

It gets messy trying to force people to log on, holding them online for a disconnection and so much worse when st had to be the ones to do it because of the tenets

[Chuuwys 502]

37 minutes ago, PanicZealot said:

Not asking lore be changed. Asking for insight. 

the insight is that afaik there's only a handful of strict rulings for why someone ever should be DC'd that people follow as a guide but not a redline ruling, it's enforced via RP as a cultural thing.  the concept of DC/unattunement is shunned and kept hush IRPly for a reason. i sympathize with the situation you might be referring to, i really do, but theres nothing that can be done or said without also accidentally contributing to metaplay, so i have to shut my trap on the matter for the sake of honesty.

 

if there was a tangible reason to think why it happened OOC then the player would have to make their case, if theres an issue where there's a belief metaplay occurred it should be reported, but if you enforced druid unattunement to be ST based rather than closed knowledge you'll have the typical issue of the friends of that ST getting away with DC worthy behaviour and no way to handle it as it should be. it is all conducted via RP, so if it happens, its typically for an RP reason, and in the case where there's obvious bias OOCly regarding the matter (which im currently aware has happened for one person, but not the one youre making the post about), that's a reportable offense and it actually became an issue BECAUSE theres st involvement, among other things.

Edited December 24, 2025 by Chuuwys

[Slorbin 2932]

I feel like immediately murdering someone after attunement so they don’t remember it should be just be covered by an OOC rule. Or you should remember something had harsh as attunement but not the murder.

[Evonpire 2014]

9 hours ago, PanicZealot said:

Now, I have played LoTC for going on four years. I have played around with a lot of magic and love most of the Deity-based magic. But one thing has always struck me as Majorly Flawed.

Why in any version of the lore should Druidic unattunement be able to be done WITHOUT OOC consent, let alone without Mod/Story supervision? If you look at just about any other deity-based magic, there are quite a few steps that need to be taken in order for some form of disconnection to occur. Shamanism, for example, REQUIRES actual screenshots proving that there have been actions committed that are grounds for disconnection; even then, a shaman is given THREE strikes. Templarism requires OOC agreement between BOTH parties to duel in some way and the loser CAN be disconnected. Paladins were similar in this way that they had strict tenets to uphold. Heck, even Seers have to abide by strict tenets. 

While yes, Druids and their magic have tenets to follow, this DOES NOT, and CANNOT stop Druids from going around and disconnecting other Druids willy-nilly as they see fit. So explain to me HOW THAT MAKES SENSE?

I have heard many stories and even seen people go through what they consider to be wrongful disconnection many times. And there is nothing they can do to argue against this. And sure, they can go back and RE-Connect, but this means starting again from the beginning. 

Is this fair? Is this right? What say you?

 

Some misinformation here - Paladin DC was mechanically chaos DC and could be done for any reason (and has been done for reasons outside of the creeds).Though largely the checks-and-balance was pariah status by both the community and Paladin events if you abused it and that it was rarely spread, so convincing another Warden to DC was difficult.

I am genuinely sorry that you or someone you know had a bad experience in roleplay with it, I understand that it sucks and losing something like magic, which, especially with druidism, can be months of RP. But also being a Shaman, I've never seen people get DC'd, despite not being very good shamans. I would rather have a chaos, to be able to make people face consequences purely in IRP, as opposed to going to an ST/ST Manager to make that decision for me. I personally am not crazy about involving OOC in an RP decision. Likewise Aspects' are extremely laissez-faire Aengudaemons and have been for a great deal of time, so it is consistent with lore.

[wowj 9747]

I don't think you 'lose your character' when they lose their magic, that's something you can move on from, you are not your magic, and thus the magic is not your character, it can be a large part of your character, yes, but you can roleplay being a disconnected whatever and have that be a character arc

[PrimnyaQuorum 3999]

17 minutes ago, Slorbin said:

I feel like immediately murdering someone after attunement so they don’t remember it should be just be covered by an OOC rule. Or you should remember something had harsh as attunement but not the murder.

 

this has happened before and there are generally plots to seer wack some guy mid dc so you dont have to kill them but they forget regardless. its just kinda what lotc is now