Jump to content

Ragadorus

Diamond VIP
  • Posts

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ragadorus

  1.  

    It honestly seems like all your reasoning is that you don't want others to roleplay as they logically in-character would and just want to be able to do whatever you want, regardless of what makes sense.  

    Why not just build your shrine to knox in plain sight, and then scream oppresion on the forums when someone discovers it and, following perfectly understandable RP reasoning, attacks it?

     

    Denying forced conquest at this point literally seems like the large-scale equivalent of emoting for other people.

    *person chooses not to attack me

    *person attacks me, kills me, and wants the very valuable land I have but chooses not to take it

    The thing is, the forced conquest is not going to replace the route of using legitimate RP to prevent the situation, like you detailed in the post.  We already have no forced conquest, and we don't see that sort of roleplay.

     

    I'm not trying to say you're wrong, or your opinion isn't valid, or anything like that, just pointing out what I perceive as flaws in your reasoning.

  2. Personally I find be the polls are not fitting to determine these situations. As the Humans are the majority player base, they will win their designated choice (aka, a biased poll).

    As a solution a different polling method should be determined, maybe dividing the votes of the various nations and unaffiliated rather than what the Staff are riding on now to get people's opinions.

    The fringe logic here being that if the humans are the majority of the playerbase - which I highly doubt; they might have a plurality, but not the majority - and all the humans have the same opinion, then the majority still chose that option.  The majority being a group of players with a different opinion from yours does not make it a less valid opinion.

  3. I swear, if you dirty bastards hurt Gimblewood... (keep the system monitored, it's important that nation leaders keep cool heads and try to decide what's best for the server rather than their nation. I'm all for it as long as it's fairly monitored!)

    I understand what you mean by this, but explain why a nation leader would not in-RP do what is best for their nation, but rather what a group of people that they in-RP dislike and are attacking want?

    I mean, yes, people like the roleplay they currently have, but I do feel that part of roleplay is having to deal with situations you would realistically not be able to just wave off.

  4. Tun'Lak
     

    Basic Information


    Age: 22

    Gender: Male

    Race: Olog


    Description

    Height: 12'6" 

    Weight: 1,387 lbs

    Eyes: Black

    Skin: Deep Red

    Personality: Generally simplistic and friendly



    Life Style

    Alignment: Chaotic Neutral

    Deity: Laklul

    Religion: Heiling Laklul

    Alliance/Nation/Home: The Swamp

    Job/Class: Olog

    Title(s):

     

    Weaponry

    Fighting Style: Smashing things.  Alternatively, picking things up, and then smashing them.


    Favored Weapon: A large battleaxe.


    Biography

    Parents: Wun'Lur and Wan'Lak

    Extended Family: Cousin once-removed Kryllal'Kog'Vanir



    History
    Tun was born in a small, innocent orcish farming village, away from his parents, not knowing his family.  His life was ruined when he was naught but a lad of six, when the peaceful village was attacked by a horde of Halfling bandits.  The village was slaughtered;  Tun found himself to be the sole survivor.

    Tun struck out and wandered until eventually, he happened upon the Trog, and met Shreck.  Shreck took him in to his clan, clan Lak, and introduced him to the wonders of the swamp and Laklul.  Tun eventually met Wun'Lur, who was determined to be his father via similar appearances advanced orcish genetic testing.

    Tun went on to have numerous incredible and episodic adventures, such as when he met Laklul, or the other time he met Laklul, or any of the multitude of other adventures that he totally had that just don't spring to mind at the moment.


    Artwork

    d24d8803078725fdb4ab1cb5eb40218c.png

    a3ab91d5a4862ea2b447e9fa8fd2e12f.png

  5. To be perfectly honest, I feel like denying conquest is taking control of roleplay in such a way that you have nowhere close to the in-RP ability to control.  Imagine if you're being attacked by bandits and you just emote not being stabbed when there's no realistic way you weren't stabbed.  Or, more accurately, you just emote that the bandits choose not to attack you.
     
    Like, I understand that it'd be less than fair to certain isolated groups that lack powerful forces being attacked by larger ones, but part of roleplay is having to realistically face situations in which you are almost inevitably going to lose.
×
×
  • Create New...