Aelu / Rel (Combustionary)

If you don't have the time to properly do something, why should we cheapen that thing as a whole to cater to you? It doesn't require you spend days at a time. When I got Earth Evocation in Asulon? I spent maybe an hour every couple of days with the teacher. Sure, every magic has a group holding a large portion of its teachers (Aside from, again, the ones like Shamanism and Clericism - Which probably won't ever be unlocked anyhow), but not all of them. If, for whatever reason, you can't convince the 'clique' to teach you, there are other teachers to find. If you manage to get on the bad side of the main group, and the teachers not affiliated? Well, that's rp.

Again, the only truly clique magic has been locked, is locked, and will always be locked. Every single other magic has teachers outside of the clique generally associated with it. Sure, it will make it harder to get magic, but how is that a bad thing? The quality of magic was best when it was restricted, and outside of the currently locked subtypes, has been slowly getting worse.

What's being suggested isn't the old system - Simply a requirement that you have a teacher. Being disliked by a certain teacher wouldn't limit anything. There are other teachers to go to, other people to try and convince. The only time it would be closed to you would be if you got on the bad side of every teacher, which is unlikely. Elitism might come to pass in some cliques, but as I already said, the magics without ic-locks (Shade, Cleric, etc) have teachers outside of the clique most of them are in. If anything, such a change would help the community by forcing players to be nice to at least a few others.

Yes. My opinion? If we can't convince a player to prove his effort to learn a magic, we can't trust that player to use the magic properly. Very few magics would be limited to a Clique, and all of those have proper reasoning (Shade, Necro, Druidism, Clericism, Shamanism), and they are locked as is. The other magics? Even currently locked ones aren't restricted. There are teachers outside of the normal 'circle' for the art. If we just had a list, and required a teacher to verify a player was being taught, Magic would improve by a factor of ten.

Without proper teaching, the overall quality of its users will decline. Some who get it via being opened would RP it correctly, but as time went on, more and more wouldn't. Keeping it relatively exclusive (Looking at the old list on the other topic? I already see a few names who still play and have it - And aren't Mage's Guild) means it has a higher standard of quality. Considering the fact that the magic relates directly to items in MC (I've still a few items with enchantments, ranging from practical to purely aesthetic), the possibilities of what it can do correlates directly with the standard of quality it is RPed at. If the magic is regarded as rare, with the few who have it knowing what they're doing, the staff will likely be more trusting to allow more interesting and complex (Not saying OP) enchantments. If it becomes open and common, I'd imagine the staff would do the opposite - Why reward a player who woke up one day with alteration with anything more than a small lighter? I'd much rather we go for 100% locking, than 100% unlocking. The lack of regulation is one of the reasons the community has fallen so far.

Let's not. If you want it, there are IC processes to getting it. Making it too open will just devalue the subtype as a whole.

It's already been said, but I also have to say no. Raids are tedious and annoying as-is. Let's not make them more-so.

It doesn't matter. It's seen by the Admins as an exploit/glitch (or something else disallowed), so if you use it on LoTC, you're exploiting a game mechanic.

[Edit] Disregard what I said about mechstand. And are you really trying to say that glitches and exploits are 'mechanical standard'? Buttons are just one option out of many to prevent ladders (Others being half-blocks, stairs, usual outcrops). KB swords, I agree, aren't too bad. But using a boat to survive a massive fall?

When possible, yes, that's always the fun way.

What's the difference between the glitches, aside from who made them? The boat glitch may not have been removed because, in normal play, it's not harmful (and actually rather amazing for drop-pods), but it's certainly not the intended purpose of the boat. Both of them are non-intended issues that we can only fix via rules. Mojang has bigger things to do than rewrite how falling or boats work in order to help a tiny minority of MC's players. We have to fill that gap in ourselves, with rules.

That is true, but in my opinion, something like the boat-exploit should be admin-approved before using it. The function of a boat is to be a boat - Anything it does that isn't boat-related should probably be done (at least on an rp-server) with a degree of caution. In this case, the Admins have, as Lego said, denied the legality of this particular exploit.

I don't see what point you're trying to make? I think it's clear to everyone that MC wasn't made with the express intent of being an RP platform. If anything, that fact adds to the argument that we have to add rules to facilitate roleplay on the medium. One such rule being that against exploitation.

So, things that can be easily rationalized within the limits of LoTC are banned (Door-hitting, Block jumping), but something that can barely be rationalized through something that (Unless it's been changed) isn't allowed, shouldn't be? If boats were intended to be used as gliders, they'd be called gliders.

Same reason other glitches haven't. Ask the minecraft dev team, not me, but are you seriously suggesting that using a boat to fall off of a cliff without taking damage makes sense? By that logic, hitting people through lwc'ed doors should be allowed because 'it's not been removed'.

Precisely. For one. The day occupations are actually rp is the day people stop complaining about them. One player in a group rping does not justify the rest not. As for boats? I don't see how the history of an exploit makes it any less of an exploit, but that's an issue for another time. What rp is there to be had? Please, explain to me what you, as an occupier, do to make the conflict rp enjoyable for the other side. Logging in to a city square to be PvPed by a group isn't fun. Don't pretend it is. Some occupations have rp, yes. Those aren't the ones people complain about. People complain about the occupations where the raiders aren't looking for rp, their looking to win. Occupations where the raiders do one or two emotes, and start killing whoever was unlucky enough to have logged off in the town square rather than in their home. People don't want to touch conflict? I can't name a single town that hasn't participated in the big war in some form. Nobody here is wanting to avoid conflict rp. People want to avoid the ooc drama that comes with rp-less conflict. You want people to rp the occupation, but what exactly do you mean? Are you expecting players to find '*sits in his basement waiting for them to go away' to be fun? Should they just blindly run outside so you can kill them? Or should they pay you a few thousand minas for the off chance that you (and here, I refer to bandits in general. I don't know how you in particular respond to payment) actually keep your word and leave? It seems that people think that the victim of a raid can just 'choose' to enjoy it. Pretend all you want that an 'occupation' magically creates rp, but it's entirely up to the raiders. If the victims of a raid don't like it, then obviously the occupying force has not rp'ed in correctly. Remember the server rules - Don't be a jerk to people.

Of course, but 'controlling' is different than accepting. We can't expect a nation to keep tabs on everyone that's a resident. But at the same time, Nations can take steps. Work with the other nation to take down the bandits as a way of 'proving' their side. If a player raids, instead of the nation he lives in throwing up their arms and saying 'He's not our military, we can't help', they can take steps to fight the issue. Right now, it seems that the majority of 'raiders' are players living in a nation. Not always official military, but still residents. If bandits were to shout a nation's name as they raided, the nation could easily prove themselves innocent by capturing and punishing the bandits.

Maybe you should just leave them alone. It's quite obvious you absolutely despise them oocly. Nothing good comes of ic conflict rooted in ooc conflict.

When it's the 'whole population', things tend to be less one-sided.

Disrupting the city is one thing. Disruption of a city is rp - Organization against the raid, fighting back, hiding and whatnot. The issue arises when the raiding party goes further, and the area becomes devoid of any rp at all. The issue at hand seems mostly to be on the part of 'camping', rather than raids themselves. None of the rules would actually hinder or restrict a raid. Well, a good raid, at least. A good raid will create rp rather than destroying it. Breaking into a city, fighting with the local guards, trying to beat them is all rp. It's conflict. Sitting there afterwards, talking on Teamspeak as you look around for stragglers and giving them nothing but a couple lines and pvp count only blocks any possibility of rp from happening there. If you want to occupy a city, there are warclaims for that. It's indicative of the grudges. Instead of attacking when rp could result, smaller parties are killed and camped during hours when it's not really possible to get an army online.

You're joking, right? City occupation isn't rp. It's two emotes followed by a pvp counter for anyone unlucky enough to log in for the duration.