ronin_champloo

3/3

An Oyashiman looked at the poster, saying the only thing on his mind with bulging eyes; "GAZONGA!"

man

3 minutes ago, LoTC's Next Top Model said:

sympathizing is comparing someone's experiences to your own and feeling empathy, which...

 

However, recognizing the potential for change is important in this instance. We were all horrible once, as when we're younger, our morals and attitudes to things are still developing. More-so when we're surrounded by people and an audience that clamors and cheers for negativity. Obviously, this doesn't excuse what he did but I'm sure we could all remember the things and actions that we've done to antagonize others -- mistakes and beliefs made when our thoughts on topics weren't set in stone, or when we were surrounded in a toxic and bad environment. Such things, I've repeated, need to be remember as are people's capacity to learn and grow.

 

Holding people accountable doesn't mean that they're forever condemned to their mistakes and deeds, but rather ensuring that they take responsibility for their actions, and continue to grow and learn from them.

 

If the guy's apologized, and truly feels guilt and shame for what he had done before, then I find that it's reasonable to consider giving them a second chance -- not forgiveness, but rather acknowledgement. Acknowledge that people can learn and grow beyond the crude person that they were once before. I don't even expect the guy to be forgiven by the community or the people that he's affected from what I've seen and the responses, but rather what I'd hope to see is for people to see that the attempt for amends is there. Be wary by all means, but hopeful.

is what this is. i find it hard to read this and not think you're trying to say that he deserves a second chance and should be allowed back on the server, without explicitly saying that.

you didn't state these things were equal, but that we should remember what we did and consider that when we judge what he did... which is called "sympathizing".

you're trying to hold a neutral fencesitting position on a very extreme situation, and it reflects poorly on you. trying to go "we all do bad things, learn, and grow, and maybe he deserves a second chance!" (which was the content of your first post that i listed above), it makes you look like you're trying to morally grandstand the fact you don't instantly throw away the possibility of allowing someone throwing rape threats around on the server.

you also didn't say the people involved should be allowed to give him a second chance, you said the /community/ should.

maybe you didn't write exactly what you meant, maybe it's not actually that deep, but what your post comes across as is really unaware, really haughty, and like you're trying to prune yourself as looking good. not to say any of those things are stains on your person, it could just be a really bad post, but it made me baulk to see someone go "oh, but we /all/ did bad things when we were young, who are we to judge? perhaps they deserve a second chance!".

it's bad optics, mate.

It's not that deep, I don't know any of the people here. I just looked at the post and wanted to put my own thoughts in it.

19 minutes ago, LoTC's Next Top Model said:

i didn't threaten, i asked. i was making the point that your "i was edgy" is NOWHERE NEAR what he said. what i said was "unless you threatened to rape people, you were not this edgy". i was saying that you're trying to draw equivocation between just being an edgy kid and threatening to rape people, hurt people, etc, and that these things just are not the same. my arguements literally don't work if you also did this.

what you did was... just be unpleasant to people? that's... fine. that's perfectly forgivable. but it's nothing like what they did. if you think people who threaten to rape people straight should be allowed back on the server, what don't you think should be allowed?

"but he really really sowwy! T_T" isn't a defense of threatening to rape people. "but i swore at some people when i was 14 and i'm different now!" is so out of the league of threatening to rape people that your point is invalid. that's the entire point of what i was saying. there is NO equivelance between what you did, what i did, and what HE did. "we were all terrible once" vastly understates and undervalues the actual harm of what he did. it's just like saying "boys will be boys".

"i understand where he's coming from, i ran with snow elves", and openly sympathizing with his situation, is a horrible look for you and makes it seem like you just don't understand the absolute scale of what he did.

it's okay, i forgive you for what you did as a kid if you were just a young no-nothing being rude and mean to people for no reason, swearing at people, etc. i think that that doesn't define you.

i do not forgive charlamagne. i think threatening to rape people when you're young does define you to some degree. i think he is perfectly capable of changing. but lotc need not be the metric for him to change, nor should he explicitly be allowed back because "we were all edgy at one point!", because even as edgy and crude as we may have been when we were young, we didn't go as far as he did. he went to an exceptional degree that resulted in his longtime ban. he, by that nature alone, is not "just an edgy kid".

Never did I state in what I said that being toxic is comparable to what he said to the aforementioned people, that was a passing comment in the introduction of my thoughts on the situation. I'm not sympathizing with his situation at all, I'm saying that having seen toxicity, albeit on a much more smaller and less severe scale, I can somewhat understand the perspectives of both sides -- the person and the people that they've affected -- as I tend to be friendly and talk to a bunch of people. That's all. It isn't that deep.

Like I've stated and shown numerous times now, I do not condone his actions. I do not expect the people and the community to forgive him at all. I'm not telling the community to give him a second chance, I'm saying that it's reasonable for people to give him a second chance to earn that forgiveness should they wish to offer it, something that is their choice, and theirs only.

I do not forgive him at all, and I cannot even say that I can forgive him if I wanted to as I'm separated from the situation. While I acknowledge that he's been remorseful and apologetic on the post, like I've said, I'm wary from seeing the arguments and debates from both sides.

5 minutes ago, LoTC's Next Top Model said:

your response was "i was edgy when i joined the server too!", which unless you were EXPLICITLY THREATENING TO RAPE PEOPLE, wasn't as edgy as he was. i don't think "man, i said some insensitive stuff four years ago" should make you immediately sympathize with the guy. sure, we all said some bad stuff, but that doesn't mean anything.

there's a huge difference between "i was rude several years ago and i'm different now so maybe it's different now!" and "ALL OF US ARE TERRIBLE AND SHOULD FORGIVE!". i said some bad stuff in my youth, and i NEVER did any of this shit! i never even came CLOSE!

not all of use were this bad. most of us wern't, which is why most of us didn't take a four year ban. you're trying to play defense for a dude you never met by saying "hey, cmon guys, people change!", when that doesn't even matter. there is a limit beyond which you've crossed a line and shouldn't be allowed back. i'm not saying he should never be able to find a job or find happiness again or he should lose everything, but he for sure should not be allowed back on the server. you do not have a right to lotc. "i'm sorry i threatened to rape you to death" isn't enough (and he apparently never even went so far as to say that to the affected party). who is to judge he's changed, if the victims all agree he hasn't and never came forward to try and fix anything?

i hope he does grow and change. i just also hope he does it elsewhere, because i won't welcome him here.

i wouldn't because i wouldn't let them back because i am firm anti-rapist.

I don't think assuming the worst out of me when I was just giving my thoughts on the topic is the best move here. By edgy, I just swore at people and was toxic to be around when I first joined the server, and joined up with the Snow Elves.

Like I said before, I'm not saying that people should forgive Charlemagne for what he's done. Not at all. I don't even know the guy, this is my perspective reading through everything here. I'm saying that I hope that his attempts of amending stuff is sincere and truthful should the community give him a chance.

Expressing my thoughts on a forum-post and discussion, and immediately being accused of throwing out rape threats is something I truly did not expect.

5 minutes ago, LoTC's Next Top Model said:

 

are you admitting to throwing out rape threats when you joined the server because that's what you're defending right now

Not at all. 

Refer to this:

16 minutes ago, ronin_champloo said:

Keep in mind that I'm not condoning Charlemagne and Co. for anything that he had done, I'm just providing my own thoughts on the topic. Hell, I've never even talked to the guy. 

As someone who used to be in his own 'edgy' phase when I joined the server, I can understand and see both sides of the conversation. Obviously, people should be held accountable for their actions, and the stuff they've said -- along with the effect and community that they may give, though the capacity for change is prevalent as we grow up. Keep in mind that I'm not condoning Charlemagne and Co. for anything that he had done, I'm just providing my own thoughts on the topic. Hell, I've never even talked to the guy. 

However, recognizing the potential for change is important in this instance. We were all horrible once, as when we're younger, our morals and attitudes to things are still developing. More-so when we're surrounded by people and an audience that clamors and cheers for negativity. Obviously, this doesn't excuse what he did but I'm sure we could all remember the things and actions that we've done to antagonize others -- mistakes and beliefs made when our thoughts on topics weren't set in stone, or when we were surrounded in a toxic and bad environment. Such things, I've repeated, need to be remember as are people's capacity to learn and grow.

Holding people accountable doesn't mean that they're forever condemned to their mistakes and deeds, but rather ensuring that they take responsibility for their actions, and continue to grow and learn from them.

If the guy's apologized, and truly feels guilt and shame for what he had done before, then I find that it's reasonable to consider giving them a second chance -- not forgiveness, but rather acknowledgement. Acknowledge that people can learn and grow beyond the crude person that they were once before. I don't even expect the guy to be forgiven by the community or the people that he's affected from what I've seen and the responses, but rather what I'd hope to see is for people to see that the attempt for amends is there. Be wary by all means, but hopeful.

Furthermore, I'd like to commend the posters for coming out with this. Showing evidence in a public forum, where names are attached, can be rather daunting. However, it's opened up an open dialogue and where all perspectives can be considered and discussed.

EDIT:

Having seen the recent posts on the AI thing, all I can say is man.

Tried to give this a read to offer some feedback and advice, though formatting's all over the place -- some mechanics are redlines, vice versa, etc. Makes it tough to read.

I'd fix up the formatting a little, furthermore the Wrath System is a tad bit confusing as well.

1 hour ago, Qizu said:

This is one of the problems I have with the piece. The CA itself can work with any culture however the “origin” derives from yulthar / yokai folklore. That by no means makes it rely on the culture per-say as it is more of an aesthetic choice of presenting the lore piece. If I were to remove it, I feel like it’d remove its uniqueness so im not sure what to do.

 

The only cultural part written in to this piece however is a warrior-esc culture that derives from a hanyo competing with one another for worship and religious purposes. 
 

Personally speaking for myself I don’t have too much of an idea for a character being based off of oyashiman culture but moreso a character that uses the yulthar lore combined with this piece’s lore to tell a narrative of how individuals can use the darkness in the world to overcome their challanges with heavy influence from IRL mysticism.

 

If you have ideas on how I could fix what you mentioned however, please reach out.

Honestly, I'd say that it's just presentation that you need to work on. I feel as if once people see the name and the images here, they'll automatically assume that it's Oyashiman lore. I'd rename the lorepiece to something else, and replace the images but that's just me.

grandfather me in or else it’s a -1 & I’m gonna make sure to tell ST to fail it in the reviews 

cheers mate hope u pick well

is the warclaim a 4v4

"Another common Azdrazi Loss.." A mask-covered man mused!

Because the majority of players are stuck in this section of the iceberg.

Regardless, seriously speaking from what I've witnessed and seen, it's not a problem of the ST hating voidal magic.. it's an issue with players themselves being unable to form their own proper opinions, and instead parroting what they've said again and again, like a circlejerk, and these reflect IRP. Concepts and thoughts that would drive a person mad are instantly believed by the Ben Shapiro, Alchemy-Guzzling and Philosophy-Snorting populace of LoTC so easily and quickly as a way to downplay, disparage and demean Voidal Mages ICly and OOCly. 

These same people will IRPly go to cities, talk about how the void is bad, and carry the same atmosphere as these guys, rather than relying on IRP experience to decide wherever or not something is bad/good.

Make your own opinions, read stuff and react accordingly to RP rather than looking toward forum posts and discord messages for your own beliefs. What you read OOCly shouldn't reflect what your character believes ICly.

6 hours ago, Slorbin said:

I’m going to expand my point a little more.

 

Kani makes it so you can fight pretty damn excellent with your fists. It should be a trade off as opposed to a straight up buff- that’s something that LOTC likes to stick too. Currently Kani is a bit too much of a straight-up buff and banning holding metal weapons fits with the theme.

 

However, mina is more just a technicality. I think mina is so small and insignificant that making people not able to carry food cash is just kindof annoying- if Kani had some sort of plugin that made it IC more valuable to have it instead of mina sure.

 

I guess the same can be said of weapons because sometimes you’ll get into pvp.

 

really like 99% of all balance issues could be fixed with a simple magic plugin.

Thank you for the feedback and points!

If I may interject though, I'd like to explain some misconceptions with Kani. One, we have to do [3] emotes to do anything while being unable to wear armor.

I wouldn't say it's a Buff since we currently aren't able to wear any armor at all, or even use weaponry. We're locked to wood. I just wanted this to be a quality of life change that allows us to carry around stuff -- we can't use this stuff in CRP with Kani, by the way -- without being punished for it.

It's not allowing them to cast Kani with metal weaponry in their other hand. It's allowing them to cast with it sheathed away or something.

EDIT:

I was wondering about this, having been recommended it by a friend. But what if it took [1] extra emote to connect in exchange for having stowed away steel weaponry?

Even though I didn't see them much, I mostly loved Vargs due to how I perceived their appearance -- they look unapologetically evil and disgusting. There's no OOC gaslighting to make people think you're a good guy. You're a cannibal, disgusting werewolf who's shameless in your ambitions.

That's a far cry from the CAs of these days, and I respect that.

Just got back home so I'll be able to respond to claims and words.

For the argument that letting Kani users have stowed away weaponry is min-max, it really isn't. If this is passed, they can't use Kani combatively if it's actively wielded.

For what happened, originally large amounts of metal stopped Resonance from occurring, and old Oscillits such as Phil wore gambeson and used Kani with steel weaponry. The change that was placed contradicts old lore, and is seen as an overreaction to a rather simple issue. I'm rather confused with the claim since the majority of the playerbase stacks and actively uses ST materials for CRP, this only allows an Oscillit to have it on their person and still be able to cast.

As for the EMP near Electronics argument, that doesn't make sense either. Think of Resonance as heat. Covering a potato with tinfoil traps the heat inside. Placing tinfoil next to the potato doesn't stop the heat from escaping at all.

The Thanhium Argument is a heavy over exaggeration, as it's rather dangerous -- able to deter a Mage or CA from using their magical abilities for an entire CRP encounter. Letting an Oscillit carry weaponry on their person is not equal to allowing a Mage to cast with Thanhium.

If there's a problem with players carrying ST materials on their person, then apply a weight limit to all players. If there's a problem with enchantments, then apply an enchantment limit. If there's a problem with Alchemy, then apply a limit of how many potions that a person has on their person -- Limit + Nerf Tawkin Mutations, perhaps as well.

This change doesn't allow an Oscillit to cast with metal on their hands, or even apply abilities on weaponry such as spears and swords. It just gives the ability to carry it on our person. It doesn't allow us to have Animii or Atronach limbs (Orc Strength BTW), etc.

If they unstow their weaponry WHILE connected, to reconnect, they must first do an emote to place it away, and then have to do [3] emotes amidst active CRP to connect once more. That's [4] emotes.

Following what Morhaund said, though, I do find that reasonable as more dense materials such as Pure-Carbarum or High-Density Boomsteel would be too thick, perhaps.

As for that, though, I'd like to see more people's ideas concerning the slot suggestion that I had.

42 minutes ago, rukio said:

Absolutely not on allowing stowed weaponry etc, it will just make it more min-max. -1 

What's wrong with that? Metal weaponry can't be used with Kani at all, so it's just to let people cast while there's stuff like that in their inventory

KANI ADDITION

Persistence with Mana

Amend:

- Kani takes [2] slots.

REASON: The versatility of Kani has led me to suggesting this, after RPing it for a few months.

Persistence with Mana

Add:

- Persistence with Mana can only affect one spell per use of the effect.

- Persistence with Mana has a range of [6] blocks.

- Only affects all projectile, tether and area of effect spells. Spells that leave a lasting effect, such as Fire-Swords aren't able to be canceled out by this.

REASON: Lowering this to match the range of Resonance and for Balance.

Continuous Resonance

Remove: Feat app requirement because LT passed it without enforcing it at all. It was an oversight.

REASON: Clarification.

The Resonance Anomaly

Add:

- In accordance with CRP rules, inciting Resonance (Connection) does not impede one's movement, nor is it hampered by moving at speeds exceeding the running standard, however a character cannot incite or upkeep resonant effects of the aggressive frequencies whilst sprinting. The incitement of passive resonant frequencies is never impeded by movement and neither resonant frequencies are affected by riding a mount at any speed.

REASON: Clarification.

Armors and Weaponry

Add: 

- Stowed away metal equipment; such as Minas, Weaponry, Necklaces, etc.. do not impede the flow of Resonance. However High-Density materials such as Pure-Carbarum, and High-Density Boomsteel would be too much for the Oscillit.

REASON: The insulated metal explanation since it doesn't make any sense given the nature of resonance and it's pre-existing interaction with metals, metal shouldn't just EMP resonance, what I'm proposing here is a compromise instead of the change that was done.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Discussion

A big point in Kani, which has been contested for a bit now, is that people say that it's used too much for feat/magic-stacking. I wanted to get people's thoughts with this before proceeding further, as while Kani as a few 'spells', the versatility and the ability to layer spells atop of one another. That, coupled with the fact that it takes [1] emote -- once connected -- to do the spells make this an extremely useful magic that can be used in most situations. However, last time I proposed this, there was a lot of debating about it.

Therefore, I wanted to know the community's feedback and thoughts on making Kani 2-3 slots. Is it good? Is it bad? Am I being too harsh? Etc. 

CREDIT

- Hexe (For ideas, explaination etc.)

unity of me (having sex) with ur mothers

make all currency aidencoin

 noob alert

31 minutes ago, Valannor said:

This MArt requires creation roleplay to be done before it may enter the review queue. 

done :)

“God is really only another artist. He invented the giraffe, the elephant, and the cat. He has no real style. He just keeps on trying other things.”

MAGIC ARTEFACT

Name of the Artefact - God of Art 

Is this a combat related Artefact? If marked as “no” it will not be usable in combat situations. - It cannot be used in combat. 

MC Name of the person(s) currently in possession of the Artefact - 

Roninchamploo 

RP Name of the person(s) currently in possession of the Artefact -  The Elephant

MC Name of the creator(s) of the Artefact (N/A if not applicable, e.g. for event items) - Roninchamploo, Werew0lf

RP Name of the creator(s) of the Artefact (N/A if not applicable) - The Elephant, The Owl

Screenshots showcasing the attempted creation of the artifact (use an imgur album or a spoiler please | if an event item just screenshot the item itself | If you're resubmitting an old MArt put N/A -

MC Item Description;

A small paintbrush of five inches in size; it is long and thin, similar to a stick, with the bristle made of feathers taken from a divine owl, once the god of prophecies and artwork, now but a fragment of his former self. The ferrule is crafted of iron, and the wood of the brush is curated from oak.

Upon using the paintbrush, numerous starry-dots begin to appear across the oak of the brush; it begins to sparkle and come to life, warping the air around the paintbrush. 

The wielder becomes the god of art, capable of painting worlds on canvas - to explore in their beck and call. However, it remains cursed by the Owl, and the rage of the Elephant follows it.

EFFECTS OF ARTEFACT

God of Art - the Painting World;

This artefact allows the user to paint a world upon a canvas or enter an existing one; it can be as undetailed, or as detailed as the user desires. Upon completing the painting, the user is able to enter the canvas either by themselves, or with others. Once inside of the painting, the world inside comes to life; it becomes more crisp and detailed, and everything becomes intractable. The user can use their brush to help those in their painting world, to rule it, or to destroy it. 

‒ This follows similar redlines to ‘Magic Mirror’ from the Demi-Djinn spell, as explained below.

‒ The user is capable of using a paintbrush on a canvas (or frame) in order to create a painting-world. 

‒ As defined, the painting world can be anything the user wants it to be – they could paint one world, numerous worlds, or even a universe of their own design. It has no interaction with the real-world, as it is merely a painting. For example, the user can create a world made of trees with tree-people, and use the paintbrush to make themself  the tree-god.

‒ The user is able to enter the painting-world by an aesthetic of their choice (being dragged into the painting, leaping into the painting, and so on).

‒ The user can bring people into the painting-world. You do not require in-character consent, as long as you have OOC consent.

‒ The user can talk about their experiences in the painting-world via a forum post or forum-roleplay, similar to shunting. 

‒ The user cannot use this amidst combat. If combat is initiated, those inside of the painting-world are kicked out of the painting. 

‒ The rules of the painted worlds do not follow the norm. Some magicks may be stronger, others may be weaker, or even not exist at all. It is all to the painter’s whim.

Limitless Ink;

This artefact does not require paint or ink. It can be used to write on parchment without having to dabble it in anything. 

‒ This brush does not require ink or paint, it has an unlimited supply.

Curse of the Elephant - Living Art;

The user is cursed with the fact that all works of art - in a five block presence of them - comes to life. If it is an inanimate picture of landscape, it simply looks like it is moving (i.e. rain falling). However, if it is an animal or a portrait of a person, it will awaken in the painting and begin to belittle the user, cursing them out for their appearance, their attitude, and so on. 

‒ This is the aesthetic of the paintbrush. 

‒ The user has to emote a painting coming to life when in a (5) block radius, and if it has a person or an animal, it will belittle them. It will act friendly towards others around them besides the user. 

‒ Everyone in the #RP channel range will hear the painting belittle them, and can also observe the animated painting. 

‒ After (5) emotes in the presence of a painting, the user has to roll out of 1d20. If the user rolls anything less than 10, the painting materialises partially. It will never attempt to do any damage enough to kill or harm the user. Please see the below for an example.

✬ A landscape painting of a forest with storms and rain comes to life. After (5) emotes, the user rolls a 7 out of 20. Instantly, winds hurl out from the painting with rain, and cover the user - making them soaked, wet and now besmirched by dirt and leaves.

✬ A portrait painting of an old knight continues to belittle the user. After (5) emotes, the user rolls a 6 out of 20. Instantly, the knight swings his metallic arm out of the painting, and punches the user in the face. 

‒ Upon the initiation of combat, the painting becomes inert. 

Curse of the Owl - He Who Watches;

The painted worlds have a guardian of their own, a being wrought of imagination that seeks to uphold the balance of things. Thus, it seeks to extinguish anything that isn’t born from the painting – the user, themselves.

The creature takes any form, but tends to be completely black, devoid of colour within the painting. It chases the user, at most times stealing their own appearance and ‘identity’ as a vague mockery of them.

‒ The creatures vary in appearances (see bendy and the ink machine for an example), but have similar characteristics to either an owl or the user themselves.

‒ The user does not have to roleplay the artwork demons in-game, and can write a forum post about their experience.

‒ The user can use the creature as an opportunity to shelf their characters for a temporary amount, before re-emerging from the painting world (can write a cool story on the forum about what they dealt with). 

‒ The number of creatures matches the number of individuals exploring a painting. Etc, two explorers conjure forth two creatures. 

??? - Ascension;

The user of the artefact can, upon old age, enter the painting-world and ascend into painting godhood, forever stuck within the painting world, and unable to enter the material plane. Forever lost in the canals of their artwork.

‒ The user can use this as an opportunity to permanently kill off their character.

‒ The user can freely create worlds in the painting world, but will never be able to come out. (PK)

‒ Upon initiating this ability, the paintbrush becomes claimable once again by another.

‒ In the event of inactivity or misuse, the ST has the right to claim the brush and set it away to another person, either via an event or by injection.

EFFECTS OF ARTEFACT

This paintbrush has been created through (2) Demi-Djinn, using the ‘MArt Creation’ ability. With this ability, the Demi-Djinn are capable of making any artefact that links back to the magic of their contractor, or their own abnormal sorcery.

The whole premise of this ability uses numerous, existing Demi-Djinn spells: ‘Magic Mirror’, ‘Party Hands’ and ‘Playing Field’ being the two. 

Through the magic-mirror spell, the user is given the power to control painting(s) as they see fit, and to enter them. As written in the ability, the user can warp the world as they desire, making it whatever they want - interactable, dead; it’s a creative ability with a creative, unlimited outlet that does not interfere with the material plane.

However, unlike the magic-mirror spell that allows a Demi-Djinn to enter both a mirror and a painting, it is only a painting for the contractor in question. 

Party-hands, which allows a Demi-Djinn to manifest items, objects, and so on - this allows the painting to seep out of the painting, to do minimal effects.

The ‘playing-field’ spell allows a Demi-Djinn in question to conjure a plethora of monsters and beasts from their mists. In a similar fashion, it curses the user to be stalked by one of the monsters, interlinking with magic-mirror, from the painting-world.

Demi-Djinn cannot use this MArt and must be given to a contractor.