WuHanXianShi14

@Narthok They wont be good rules until there's a player cap and rams and all other forms of siege equipment are removed, and cooldowns are consistent, win or lose.

21 minutes ago, H7R5 said:

Yikes untrue. Don't give people a reason to raid you and they will not raid you.

Sure, only a lot of the time those reasons include "We dont like you OOCly" or "youre active, therefore you get raided since we cant raid a ghost town"

Don't tell me what is and isnt true, I've been in literally a hundred or more raids since I joined this server

3 minutes ago, H7R5 said:

Another thing that I think is odd is that people think that raiders want to raid their factions for no reason or just to bully them. If there is no benefit to raiding you, no armor, no wealth and no political motive, then you will not be raided...

Objectively untrue. Plenty of groups both modern and in the past on LOTC who look for people to raid for the sake of raiding.

3 minutes ago, Narthok said:

Axing chest rules, there is no reasonable compromise to be had here and the rp generated from the looting would not outweight the rp generated by the use of those items. 

Great, now implement a player cap for raiders, maintain a consistent cooldown that isnt determined by who wins and loses, and remove siege equipment.

@Narthok Could you stop defaulting to assuming most people who disagree with your proposal just dont understand the rules you wrote

Also, off hours are different for everyone. Determining arbitrarily what is and isnt off hours isnt gonna stop people across a range of many timezones from getting their **** taken when they're not online. People also have different work and school schedules.

Just now, Narthok said:

Hm, well what would you suggest? I'm just saying I don't think a group like the kha or high elves will ever really be raided because people don't remember where they are half the time. 

Frankly, doesnt matter if youre a big or a smaller playerbase, no one deserves to have their desire to play grinded down by constant raids. This applies to everyone who simply finds no enjoyment in PVP, and sees it only as a necessary evil to expediate RP in certain situations (Which, by the way, is most people).

Your rule proposal now enables larger groups who want to eliminate smaller rivals out of existence by making the game unplayable to do so without any real restriction by raiding them every 2 days. NO one enjoys having to deal with **** like that every 2 days.

And frankly, this bias against small playerbases is a misguided one anyways. They'll always exist, and if you basically punish them harshly for the sole crime of not wanting to RP in the main (and often congested) RP hubs then they wont join the RP hubs, they'll just leave and take their RP to other platforms. I don't get why you think its okay to **** smaller groups just because they're small.

10 minutes ago, Narthok said:

 

These groups are either not visible enough to be raided due to the restrictions upon raiders.

Never doubt someones ability to be bored enough to find someone to annoy.

Quote

And furthermore should factions incapable of defending themselves despite visibility remain independent? 

What a backwards and shitty attitude, there are much better ways for small settlements to survive or be absorbed than by subjecting them to shitty raids every 2 days until they no longer want to log on. You think they'll say "Sure let's move to Oren" if that happens to them, or will they just leave?

@Narthok don't use my playerbase as a means to justify yourself

1) sure, wood elves have a large rally. Many others don't, and will be fucked by constant raids where they're outnumbered like jollybee said.

2) we could rally 30 to fight off a big raiding party, but those are bordering on warclaim numbers and last for multiple hours (1 hour for rallying, potential 1-2 additional hours of fighting) Raids should NOT be warclaims or last that long. Especially if you can't win and are stuck doing it once every 2 days.

Please try again 

Add a raid cap, if no 1 hour warning then 10 people. With a 1 hour warning, 20 people. 

Remove siege equipment from raids.

@Narthok how many people need to tell you the same thing before we get upgraded from some insignificant group of screamers who just don't *GET IT*

We all read your rules and we dont like them.

Raids should never be mini warclaims and you will get pushback until raid caps are reestablished at the VERY least.

1 minute ago, Jaeden said:

 

Leo, he took on most of the suggestions proposed in my feedback. I think it's a genuine effort to improve raids. But when you barrage someone with aggression, usually they'll reply with it. I sure would.

He takes on the ones he personally agrees with, not the ones he doesn't like. That isn't an appropriate attitude for a supposedly objective gm looking to create rules that benefit everyone.

You don't get to pick and choose.

@Narthok seems like these are the rules YOU want, the collective community not so much. Why even ask for feedback when most of the time you seem to default to telling the feedback givers why they're wrong when they don't support your ideology?

Just now, Narthok said:

 

"Caps are cancer"

Are you actually going to listen to feedback and act on it or just get defensive and let your own opinions dictate the shape of these rules (Which no one asked to be rewritten, by the way)

11 minutes ago, Narthok said:

 

Its simple- if they d40'd, they can be captured. If they were popped, they can't be. You killed them. If they were downed, and died because they went too long without being revived, then you can't capture them. It simply means you were too distracted fighting the remaining opponents to properly secure your captive.

Raids are NOT warclaims. You want to turn raids into full pitched battles, which they are not and never should be, ever. Not only is it unfair to be able to mobilize the full force of your army and attack a settlement with it on a regular basis, it is unrealistic and contrary to any IRL standard. Raiding parties are smaller. A fully mobilized army is bigger. That is fact.

A raiding cap is not as unfair as your PVP goons would have you believe. RAIDERS HAVE THE ADVANTAGE OF SURPRISE. THEY CAN TAKE AS LONG AS THEY LIKE TO RALLY UP A FULL PARTY, WHEREAS DEFENDERS ONLY HAVE A FEW MINUTES TO RALLY UP EQUAL NUMBERS WHEN THE RAIDERS ARRIVE AT THEIR DOOR. You admitted yourself, raiders often outnumber the defenders.

Your "settlement" rule won't do ****. Your cliquey raider groups will just be given land in a nation sympathetic to them and begin raiding in their name. Or better yet, make new characters (I use characters in the loosest sense of the word, more like skins to pvp in) to do so. This would all be done OOCly, of course.

And **** off with your implication that having walls up = an elitist isolationist clique. Walls are put up to prevent raids, and nothing else. Because god forbid we put up walls to defend ourselves. And no, you shouldn't be able to break them down with siege equipment every god damned raid. RAIDS ARE NOT SIEGES. NOR SHOULD THEY BE.

As we all know, historically, raiders regularly attacked fortified, walled settlements, instead of pillaging the countryside

Nations, when conducting raids, instead of sending small, fast moving lightning groups, would also regularly fully mobilize the entirety of their army and send it in and out of enemy territory. They would be able to do this once every two days/two weeks.

Just now, Narthok said:

You clearly didn't read the rules then buddy. An hour warning is given to defenders Its one of the first things in the document.

 

Doesn't matter, a raid should not be a mini-warclaim and there should be a cap on the raiders. The current cap is fine.

Quote

Your third point is already a rule in practice serverside as to prevent people from d40ing out of rp and such.

Yeah, for purposefully D40ing when someone has kept you alive and intends on capturing you. If you choose to purposefully pop someone during PVP then expect to be able to capture him afterwards, thats absolutely retarded.

Quote

They are extremely expensive and can be very easily destroyed.

Lol, no they aren't. 7-15 is nothing and super easy to shell out for any relevant faction. and there should be no siege equipment during raids, period.

Quote

Rams are to prevent people from cutting themselves off from the rest of the world and forming insular cliques.

Wow, so that's why people lock themselves behind gates huh, not cause they want a reprieve from constant raids they frankly find no enjoyment in, but because they're elitists in a clique. Gotcha.

Quote

Raids are so restrictive that your only feasible hope of winning is by bringing the best of the best. Rather then allowing all players to participate in conflict content.

Its almost as if raids are supposed to be smaller, more contained skirmishes as opposed to big open battles with two nations fighting at full power- we have a thing for the latter- it's called warclaims.

Quote

Back in the fringe every decterum noob had fond memories of being involved in daily pitched battles. Both those defending Dungrimms mouth and attacking it look back fondly. However its not feasible to go all the way back to that.

So you're looking at the past with rose tinted goggles and letting it influence how you want to shape the server today.

Quote

But I'd like to move rules in a direction that prevent content from being locked exclusively to experienced and established players. Lets bump up our content engagement to improve our retention.

What the hell kind of logic is that, exactly what prevents a group of new players from going on a raid?

Furthermore, you know how many new players are stuck DEFENDING against raids? Its not like they're being sheltered from it all.

Right, its all for the *new players* (lotc's favourite buzzword) but it totally won't be the new players who end up suffering, because it turns out most of them actually want to make roots and establish RP in active settlements instead of going out and becoming career raiders. And these settlements can now effectively be bullied with psuedo-warclaims every 2 days which frankly can be incredibly disruptive to RP and dampen people's desire to log on.

ITT: Career raiders saying how raiding should be easier for them. Settlement defenders saying why it shouldn't.

Every couple of months one of these two sides shouts loud enough that it compels the staff to tweak the raid rules (AGAIN) to maintain the illusion that they're being proactive.

I could not hate these proposed rules more.

1) Keep the current cooldown. Changing cooldown times based on who wins/loses is stupid.

2) Battering rams are stupid. Allowing raiders to bring siege equipment on literally every raid is dumb. Keep them to warclaims.

3) If you pop a person during PVP, you shouldn't be able to capture them. This makes sense realistically too. During a raging melee IRL you would not have total control over who lives and who dies. If you can keep them alive MCly you can capture them, if not, too bad. This capture rule is beyond dumb.

4) No raid cap is asinine. You're essentially turning raids into mini-warclaims and the line between the two is blurred. So a settlement can be raided with any amount of people, and that settlement is ALSO given no notice at all to prepare? Sounds fair.

I don't understand what is currently wrong with the raid rules and why you feel it requires fixing, beyond the screaming of a small group of career raiders who want less rules regulating them.

Until I feel that piercingdarkness is able to respect and tolerate mineman roleplayers of all colours and creeds I am unsure if there should be a place for him on our venerable team of professional mineman staff...........

1 minute ago, arakrsptec said:

I'm all for these interactions, mind you. I just think that 1. they shouldn't be confined to Druid led groups and 2. blessings don't need to be actual powers

1. I agree, non-druids should have a means to summon a mani without a druid present. Although it should by no means be easy

2. eh, yes and no. I think smaller interactions with Mani dont need to result in physical blessings. Would be cool to convince one to summon rain or cure a blighted field for you or something along those lines exclusively in big event situations.

@GrimReaper98

Sadly, the culture we built we had to do in the very context of that Aenguldaemon/Tsuyose/SupremacyOps lore validation because it was the hand we were given. Canonists and low fantasy humans can afford to ignore it, since human RP frankly exists in a thematic bubble completely isolated from the other fantasy races.

However, for a high fantasy, magic heavy race and culture and society, we have no choice but to ensure that our religion was up to the par set by other magics, gods, religions, etc.

I'm down for a world where all gods and supernatural beings exist only in myth and any interaction with them is nonconclusive at best. However, we're in too deep for that to happen. And when a ton of cultures build their culture off of canonically existant deities that interact with them directly, asking us to RP our patron spirits as a purely cultural construct instead of a real entity is asking us to shoot ourselves in the foot.

I don't think you'll achieve much taking out your frustration towards the state of LOTC's lore by focusing on this piece in particular. How the Mani turned out to be is nothing more than a symptom than the cause.

What you want is to create a movement pushing for the involvement of ALL deific figures and supernatural magical entities in LOTC lore to take a back seat and no longer provide direct interaction with the mortal playerbase. If that happens, I'd be happy for Mani to exist in a cultural context, but until the state of the LOTC world is fundamentally changed, that isn't going to happen.

1 hour ago, GrimReaper98 said:

Broadening the interactions to beyond druids is also a big red herring for people to be diverted from the problem with the entire concept, it's written to be interactable but I can assure you that it'll never happen to anyone bar druids.

Some screenshots showing events that have centered around religious festivities revolving around the Mani. The first screenshot is of the Winter's festival which revolves around the summoning and revering of Amaethon, the Deer Mani. Both druids and non-druids were involved in this event. A second winter's dance was later done which resulted in Amaethon's ethereal form meeting the dancers.

Generally, I encourage non-druids and newer players to attend these events, as it is a great introduction to cultural RP- as something beyond just words on a forum post, but something that is actually RP'd out, and has tangible roots in the game world.

You are factually incorrect in your statement. The mani have, and will continue to apply to a wide variety of players, druids and non-druids alike. The whole point, in my case, was to enrichen and add substance to Elven culture as a whole. It makes absolutely no sense, in that goal, to limit interaction with the Mani to just a niche group, our druids.

@Gallic Also has a psuedo-celtic human culture that worships the Mani in an animist style.

Quote

There should be no need to interact with gods

The Mani aren't gods.

They're lower level supernatural creatures more akin to niche spirits. A comparible from a similar fantasy setting would be the Crones in the Witcher 3. These creatures are not Gods, however, they ultimately are very powerful, do not age, have powers considered supernatural or "beyond mortality".

The Witcher World is a good comparison in general, as that world is chock full of supernatural creatures, many of whom possess powers far beyond common mortals, many of whom are ancient, and have ascribed legendary, mythical or god-like status among humans, elves and dwarves. Yet these supernatural creatures are all ultimately part of the physical world, and share the same earth as your average joe peasant. They aren't gods, in the sense that they are omnipotent, all seeing, and all powerful. But, they are ancient, magical and something beyond a simple mortal.

It's a very common theme in high fantasy.

The real world comparables for Mani are the Shinto spirits of Japan, and many Animist spirits and supernatural creatures that exist in myth and folklore across peoples all over the world. My main source of inspiration is the indigenous people of the Northwest Coast of US and Canada, as its the region in which I was educated. In folklore like these, supernatural creatures baring animalistic or naturalistic forms interact regularly with humans. Indigenous folklore features hundreds of stories of humans coming across and interacting with serpent spirits, Raven gods, supernatural thunderbirds, giant cannibal spirits, etc. Same goes for Japan, like in Mononoke (an Anime, I know, but its Miyazaki so I trust his integrity to represent japanese folklore in a tasteful way) the Shinto Animal Gods like the Boar and the Wolf are powerful, old and supernatural- yet also just part of the world.

Its largely this cultural folklore that I personally drew from when writing Mani lore. However, as we exist in a high fantasy world with magic, dragons, elves and whatnot, I see no reason why instead of it being just that- folklore, that there should not be old spirits and magical encounters that people should be able to participate in.

In the real world, people tell stories of humans walking amongst magical creatures and ancient beings, in fantasy worlds- those stories are actually played out. because that's just what it is, fantasy.

I don't like the concept of being able to interact regularly with actual Gods (Gods as we understand them in a Judeo-Christian context, ergo all-seeing, omnipotent, big man in the sky, etc) And frankly, I quite hate Aenguldaemon lore. That doesn't mean I don't think that supernatural beings should not roam the earth, and that humans should not be able to interact with them.

Quote

there should be no pressure to have to worship something that can be legitimised and shown in roleplay because it "imbues" the culture.

And so there isnt. Your logic is that proof of the Mani's existence serves as a means to pressure people OOCly to have their characters worship them. That makes no sense to me. We have solid, canonical proof that Tahariae, Aerial, Xan, the Aspects, the Spirits and many other deities exist. Does that mean that people are compelled to worship them? Not at all.

You can know something exists, and understand what it is, yet still choose not to follow it, or even to actively oppose it, because of idealogical or background related reasons. That's more or less the entire point of the IC movement of Xionism. In the Mani's case, it isnt like they would be going out their way to compel mortals to worship them either, as the lore heavily emphasizes that they are very elusive.

There are a million and one reasons to justify NOT worshipping the Mani, whereas I could count the reasons to justify actually worshipping them on one hand, and most of them are born of a niche idealogy or racial background. Something existing does not mean there's any obligation either ICly or OOCly to worship it.

Quote

I believe it should just stay as a cultural belief.

That would work if that was the universal standard.

Unfortunately, if we do that, then we put ourselves at a disadvantage against all the other figures of worship that are confirmed to exist. You get asked, why worship the Mani, who we don't even know if they're real, when there are spirits and aenguls and daemons who have literally shown their face to mortals and spoken to us?

The precedent of LOTC lore is that supernatural beings interact with the mortals. So that's the precedent we must follow.

With that said, its a moot point anyways, since whether or not you want Mani to exist, they do- they're written into canon lore and have been interacted with before in RP- this is just a clarification post.

Quote

You do not need lore posts to justify your culture

A culture needs substance. Substance is born of writing.

I can see why playerbases like the humans dont need lore posts to justify their culture. They're a non-magical, very low fantasy environment.

Unfortunately, for playerbases with a more high fantasy focus, whom interact with magic and supernatural motifs more frequently, we do need to work through the lore team, as any magic related phenomena cannot be approved without them.

It ultimately broils down to your dislike of high fantasy vs low fantasy, which ultimately is your personal opinion.

Every race has background lore, ergo, lore set in ancient times which was not actively RP'd out by players, but is instead backstory. The Humans have the story of St. Owyn, Harren, Aeldin, the formation of the church. The Dwarves have Khorvad and etc. The Elves have the golden pools (high elves) and the wood elves have their Seed history and folklore.

Mani have also become interwoven as a core part of elven roleplay and culture. As we've expanded upon the depth and substance of our lore over the years, the need to interact with the Mani in different ways has arisen.

Mani and Mani summoning has been accepted and canon lore for awhile now. The only difference is with Mani becoming more and more prominent in cultural RP, regulation and rules regarding interaction with them need to be clarified to a greater degree, hence this thread.

To further clarify, the Mani can be interacted with by any character, not just druids. Similar to how not everyone who worships the Aspects is necessarily a holder of Druidic magic, the same goes with interaction with Mani.

Summoning Mani, as specified in the thread itself, is less like "Summoning" in the sense of being able to call upon a creature at will, and control it like a familiar. Mani are free spirits, and cannot be controlled. Summoning in this case is more like "Calling upon them' in the hopes they will deign to respond to you. Even then, Mani hold no gauranteed loyalties to druids, elves, or any descendant peoples.

Just now, xxx said:

 

I dont think he should have been banned I'm just saying that the LT were right to not allow a reenactment of "Das Boot" on LOTC

As others have said I imagine its basically because a floating island castle fits within the high fantasy theme, whereas a Soviet Nuclear Submarine does not

Yep that's me 

The hunt for Red Malin's welcome 

22 minutes ago, The Templar said:

Druids have enough "event" hooks. If you want something "cool" to RP for events, use a meldamiriel. Use an ent. Use a spriggan. This is just another blatant attempt to empower the aspectist religion to get a leg up on everyone else. Hard no from me. Use what you already have instead of summoning literal demigods to force your will on other players. 

Too bad it's already a thing, and has been used in rp for over a year.