Jump to content


Gold VIP
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,650 Godly

About _Jandy_

  • Rank
    Esteemed Royalty
  • Birthday 07/22/1998

Contact Methods

  • Minecraft Username
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    ELO Hell

Character Profile

  • Character Name

Recent Profile Visitors

27,908 profile views
  1. Remember to vote on potential imprisonment rule changes:


  2. _Jandy_

    [Shamanism] Disconnection

    I’m not sure how you feel about it but I’ve always interpreted things as Orcs having an easier time making pacts with the Spirits. Given the racially blessing to be honorable it makes more sense that a Spirit would make a pact with an Orc, knowing that the pact will be upheld because of that honor, than anybody else. Now I of course think non-Orcs should be able to learn if they have actually made extensive efforts to prove themselves worthy, like Phaedrus or Lex as you’ve previously mentioned.
  3. _Jandy_

    [Shamanism] Disconnection

    I’m happy to comment on this matter, given I was the main LT involved with handling this situation. The old Dark Elf form of Shamanism was an utter failure and so it was simply removed. In it’s removal came the question on if there should be compensation so that their cultural still had some semblance of a backbone to it, most people said that there should be a replacement in the form of standard Lutaumancy. I had developed an event line where the Dark Elves could go about beginning to learn Luta but Smawton and I had a disagreement with how the event should go down. He was the Dominion Dark Elf leader and ET at the time so I figured his voice would be helpful to the matter though I personally think that I was wrong in involving him. He wanted the magic to essentially be given not only just to his group of elves but also given as fast as possible with little effort in the event line that would lead up to the development of the magic within the culture. Ultimately our disagreement became so problematic that we were tossed into a chat with managers to supervise our discussion and the entire project was entirely dropped because Smaw pointed out that Dakirenisss had become active again and could teach in a way that would not require an event. So I wouldn’t really say that it was forced down anybody’s throat.
  4. _Jandy_

    [Shamanism] Spirit Smithing Rewritten

    No, you need to explain that sort of stuff well before you expect it to be accepted.
  5. How would you improve Shamanism?
  6. _Jandy_

    Comprehensive Imprisonment Reform

    I'm not sure you've read the post entirely.
  7. _Jandy_

    Comprehensive Imprisonment Reform

    This is a generally poor idea in my opinion because it could be a way to indefinitely detain, which shouldn't be the goal, players and it may specifically bring a great level of harm to newer players who aren't involved with a nation, family or guild that would go about helping to free them. I think you are agreeing with my proposition based off of these points.
  8. _Jandy_

    Comprehensive Imprisonment Reform

    don't give away my plans bro, thanks
  9. _Jandy_

    7.0 Annoucement!

  10. _Jandy_

    Comprehensive Imprisonment Reform

    To address your initial point I think that the timer of no rp would be counter intuitive since as soon as a guard logs off to go to sleep the prisoner is gonna be turning on their stopwatch. Next the point over wanting immunity to imprisonment for minor crimes is something that I don't think should particularly be upheld by rules. In my opinion I think that it would stand to be an IC issue, for example if Krugmar were to lock up any folks who simply trespassed then that may be something that other nations (the homes of the imprisoned folk) would want to address. Though if this were to be primarily used for the Personal/Guild sanctioned jails and you suspect OOC targeting you could report such but ultimately so long as the level of roleplay provided is generally acceptable then it seems like something to just coast out and try to enjoy. Lastly I don't think that rules against or condoning gladiatorial combat quite fit here. I'll admit that I hadn't even thought of it but it should ultimately still follow the laid out requirements for any other prison, providing good rp that the captors are putting rp into on a consistent basis. Even if it's OOC targeting you can still report poor villainy or call for moderator intervention if they fail to provide a decent quality of roleplay on a consistent level. Thanks for the feedback and I think there are certainly ways to go about imprisonment RP that isn't strictly reliant on a guard force. I think that RP can be divided into two categories which are RP between multiple characters and RP between your character and an external influence. So to give some examples of what I mean I would say that guards could generally avoid issues where a character goes for long stretches of time without RP with other folks (assuming the guard force can't hold their hand the entire time) by permitting roleplay between many prisoners or even by setting up Stocks or a Pillory in the city itself. Alternatively I think that guards could leave the prisoner with things such as a book to write in or a book to read. With those examples the player can still engage in expressing how their character would react to their imprisonment by writing about it or alternatively if they are given books to read they may yet be developing as a character by learning new things or being encouraged to internalize a pattern of thought that is provided by the group or state oppressing them. Of course these example aren't the only possible solutions, just simple idea to illustrate the point so that hopefully you can best understand a few of the available opportunities that this system can still provide given that there is a largely failing guard force.
  11. The current rules of imprisonment are as follows: §3.17 A player may only be held against their will for up to 3 hours of roleplay. §3.18 A noble or leader, can be held up to 5 hours of roleplay. §3.19 You can not be held captive for over 15 minutes without sufficient roleplay. --- The intent behind the rules are clear, to prevent people from being simply captured and locked away without getting any attention. These rules encourage the captors to continuously roleplay with their prisoners which is a good thing, nobody should just be locked away from roleplay indefinitely. 3 hours of time, in my opinion, is a very short span of time that does little to actually progress a character or encourage a player to partake in the experience of being held as a captive. Often times people may just wait out their timer until they can leave when instead their character could face a million different developmental situations that are often missed out on. The result of these minimal timers is ultimately a major disinterest in being taken as a captive as well as a major disinterest in taking a captive since it is ultimately a futile effort and as a result people tend to deal with their adversaries with a swift execution or a banishment. This execution is ultimately just as futile as any 3 hour imprisonment because there is no room for the captured character to develop from this, the execution will just send them back to the Cloud Temple where they will continue on as if nothing had ever happened. Banishment on the other hand does have a decent effect on a character by barring them from a society though ultimately it does not truly offer any way to resolve a conflict between a character and a culture. For example a whitewash Orc who is banished ultimately faces no repercussion for their actions and even through execution they will not have to face ever needing to conform no matter how much effort the Orcs were to put into trying to stop his actions. Though with a comprehensive change in the imprisonment rules the whitewash may have to realize that there are actual consequences to actions and perhaps they will change their way. Many people may be opposed to giving other players the ability to actually put a meaningful incentive towards changing their character’s behavior but ultimately it’s because they have no interest in dynamic roleplay or character development but instead put a focus on character progression. To clarify what I mean by that character development, in my own words, is for a character to be changed by the events surrounding them while alternatively character progression would be for the player to have a set vision on what they want their character to be or do and then ignore their surroundings while tunnel visioning on their end goal for the character. Of course the latter example makes roleplay less meaningful and is primarily allowed because there are no repercussions for any actions on this server that can change a character in any way and hopefully imprisonment roleplay can strongly encourage that. For the above reasons I would like to suggest the following amendments to the imprisonment rules: Two kinds of jails or prisons will exist, nation sanctioned jails and personal/guild sanctioned jails. Nation sanctioned jails may detain a character for a 5 day maximum (unless the captive wishes to remain longer) before the prisoner is allowed to soul stone away. Personal or Guild sanctioned jails may detain a character for a 2 day maximum (unless the captive wishes to remain longer) before the prisoner is allowed to soul stone away. Nation sanctioned jails may be demoted to a Personal or Guild sanctioned jail if they are found to have participated in inflicting a poor level of roleplay quality based off of the following margins: Amount of roleplay made available to the prisoner Quality of roleplay made available to the prisoner Building quality of the cell or jail. To appeal for a Personal or Guild sanctioned jail (formerly Nation sanctioned jail) to regain it’s status they must wait at least 2 weeks to contact a GM Manager and explain how they have modified their imprisonment experience so that it will not be demoted once again. The manager has full discretion to approve or deny this appeal. Successful raids that were led with the intention to free a specific prisoner do not need to make any attempt to unlock things to free the prisoner. A GM will unlock access to the prisoner upon request. The incentive to provide a higher quality of roleplay begets the opportunity to better use the imprisonment system. I want to make it clear now that people who are running a Personal/Guild sanctioned jail poorly should still be reported for poor villainy roleplay even if they are not technically the villain in the situation. Even guards, specifically the person who imprisoned a character, are responsible for providing a high quality of roleplay and if they are unable to do so then they are required to inform the player of such a situation and from there proceed accordingly. For example: --- Guard: “Hey, I know that I’m imprisoning your character now but there is a large likelihood that I will not be able to log on tomorrow and I can’t guarantee that other guards will interact with you, how would you like to proceed?” Prisoner: “Well I’d really prefer if I didn’t have to just sit here all day tomorrow with no RP, would you mind if I SS’d out at around 4 EST tomorrow if nobody engages in RP with me?” Guard: “That sounds fair to me, have a nice night and here is my discord if you would like to get in contact with me. WhiteRose#2013” --- Ideally imprisonment roleplay may involve many things such as: Monitoring prisoners, providing for prisoners, discussion between guards and prisoners, discussion between fellow prisoners, an attempt to rehabilitate prisoners, conflict between members of the jail, interaction between members of the general population and the prisoner, internal conflict and it’s appropriate expression for the prisoner, the ability to escape the jail, meeting new people, incentivizing prisoners for good behavior, stripping a prisoner of their identity to find who they are at their core, etc... --- I personally think that it’s worth noting that this could also add a level of depth to raids where it may give them more meaning to either try to capture somebody or free an ally while it may also give an actual consequence for failed raids. Of course these rules aren’t perfectly fleshed out and many people may entirely hate the sentiment behind them but that is alright and I’d love to hear criticism or ideas. I hope people understand the value of RP that this could bring forth or at the very least can acknowledge the downsides that the current system presents. Thanks!
  12. I'd really love to see some changes regarding imprisonment rules so that the only two viable options for dealing with opposing characters doesn't have to be execution or banishment (fines would work if we had a decent economy system but that's a different topic) but I don't really know what kinds of changes should be made. What do you guys think?

    1. Show previous comments  3 more
    2. NotEvilAtAll
    3. Papa Liam

      Papa Liam

      I’ve thought about this a lot, to the point where last map, I assisted in the creation of an imperial prison for a short time in Johannesburg. We had a holding cell, five cells above ground, about ten cells in the lower floors, four solitary confinement chambers, faculty offices, a clinic, a courtyard, storage chambers, and even a laboratory. Our prison was very successful, but thats only because crime in Johannesburg was abnormally rampant, so we had a lot of opportunities to arrest a variety of criminals. Most of them enjoyed the short term captivity, and there were even some asking if prison RP was a long term goal of ours. If we enforced more rigorous soulstone and /d20 rules for imprisonment, I think that the people who would want to participate in prison RP — which seems to be an unexpectedly large base — would actually be eager to play some brand of criminal, not to mention that additional criminals serving an IRP year long sentence or so would also experience the prison RP. 


      Not only would suggested reforms bring about fun and dynamic prison RP, it’d make more functional sense for select nations. I suggest you make a thread about this.


      Oh damn never mind you made a thread already

      Edited by Papa Liam
    4. Narthok


      I'll look into putting up a community review with Jandy's rules to see if the community would like something like this. 

  13. _Jandy_


    Changed Status to Accepted