Arafel

PVP stinky.

I don't know if this is quite it, but the more I read the post, the more convinced I am its goal is to make CRP undesirable for players to partake in. Edit: What I mean by this is: as someone who doesn't particularly enjoy engaging in combat role-play right off the bat, I could at least find solace in it not requiring me to keep track of arbitrary rules and restrictions on in-game and out-of-game variables such as distance, time, or text character limit. I was able to make short work of it through the same means most other role-play interactions were dealt with, abiding by a sense of fair play, understanding (or trusting) anyone abusing this honor system of sorts would be reprimanded if they took things too far. However, adding restrictions such as these only makes the prospect of dealing with combat role-play something for me to dread, specially being one who enjoys elaborate descriptions in the spirit of providing other players with a better grasp over the actions and scenery I'm attempting to convey to them. I can try and keep track of 4 or 8 blocks of movement per emote, but the arbitrary consequences of falling X or Y number of blocks is going to have people pausing combat to go look at the rules over and over again. I'm calling it now. This looks less like a change in the name of balance, and more of a change in the name of convenience. Not the players' convenience, mind you, but rather the moderation team's convenience. They're not formulated with common sense and fair play in mind, like the majority of the rules and guidelines for a role-play environment ought to be. Rather, they're formulated so as to function as clear-cut restrictions that facilitate matters for anyone who may have previously worried about whether or not one or more involved parties were abusing the honor system for their own selfish gain/enjoyment - or, more specifically: to facilitate matters for anyone in charge of moderating such scenarios and trying to figure out whether or not fair play was thrown out the window by someone abusing the honor system. If you are having trouble discerning abusers from people who enjoy their combat flavor-text a bit too much, implementing rules and changes such as these makes perfect sense. However, it also introduces restrictions that will undoubtedly change the manner in which people approach combat and strategize, while also making it tedious for those of us who couldn't care less whether they win or lose in a fight, so long as it was enjoyable for all those involved. You're better off just enforcing the spirit of established rules rather than the letter of new ones, and making it clear anyone that raises a few sets of eyebrows too many with their way of doing combat role-play is going to get reprimanded one way or another. As it stands, you're asking us to keep track of arbitrary restrictions under the pretense it will make things flow more smoothly. In reality, we'll have to remind ourselves of yet another set of variables that will directly affect the manner in which we approach combat on top of everything else one would normally have to keep track of when fighting other people, when all we players ought to be doing is focusing on the character interactions at hand and their immediate consequences, trusting the moderation team will no doubt step in if anyone calls foul or the situation spirals out of sensible hands. TL;DR You're delegating responsibilities onto the players. We're here to role-play; to interact with other people in a shared narrative resulting from our contributions and compromises - not to keep track of a movement system, timed engagement, and fall damage, with the added emote character limit on top of the above.

Wait, what problems does the existence of this system altogether intend to solve again?

It's fascinating to me, this phenomenon: making a world so large, populating it with many an imposing sight to see, but nothing to compel or justify the time-sink of exploring its landmarks, which results in the need for means to fast travel - rendering all that time and effort crafting such a landscape fruitless. And then there's that second issue you mention; it leads to the consolidation, if not outright fossilization of RP centers where people are guaranteed to be. Thus, all other sites become devoid of life and the interactions that could spawn in or around them dissipate alongside the players. Edit: One thing I find fun to bring up whenever I run into massive worlds that could be argued bring a more "realistic" scale to a setting or its geopolitics is the fact this same issue with scale is part of the reason why, for most of our written history, the majority of a settlement's population could spend their entire lives never wandering yonder than their natural or human-made borders. Generations of humans would live and die in a single settlement because traveling to neighboring ones often times was too long and/or too arduous a journey to be worth their while. Why risk losing what little you have where you are for the ephemeral possibility of more, somewhere else?

As an outsider looking at the world map linked on the forum tabs, it very strongly reminded me of Genshin Impact.

What is something you consider to be lost potential in the way pre-established lore is utilized on the server?

Please, make it a point to develop this new world under the assumption you won't get to have a 10.0. You've said it yourself: Lord of the Craft has over a decade of history behind it. However, due to this seemingly endless cycle of wiping previous worlds and starting over with a "newer and improved" one, none of this rich history can be experienced by newcomers lest they wander around as spectators in the old world exhibits or spend an evening browsing the wiki - which itself is lacking a great number of events. I know I'm not alone in stating I would give anything to be able to have my character inhabit a world where you can witness the work of past generations slowly but surely become the very foundation of future nations and civilizations. Forget about exploring pre-planned dungeons and ruins we, as players, hold no attachment to and quite frankly have little reason to care about in-character. I want to delve into archeological dig sites unearthing someone's long-forgotten mud hut and speculate as to what its purpose once was, who built it and what events transpired there. What purpose does it serve to shape the narrative, if the only mark that will outlive us is the hope someone will get around to recording it on the wiki, or that those we leave behind are able to remember and care to pass it on? So, please, make it a core aspect of your vision to honor every memorable moment, crafted by the player, by bringing an end to this world-reset crutch past generations of staff grew all too comfortable with, forgetting the reasons why it ever even began in the first place. On a side note: if you want to emphasize what is crafted by the player, do make it a point to bring back the ability for us to build on-site instead of copying everything over from a build server. Excluding the stuff that is to be present on release, make it a point to allow for us to build the towns and cities we and future generations of players are to have their characters inhabit. Allow us to make it our own not just during its development, but throughout its lifespan.

That’s okay. We can always resort to bullet-shaped, dense, metal projectiles yeeted at 100mph through the use of slings like the Romans did back in the day. It’d be about as deadly as a .44 magnum with the caveat of slightly less stopping power and an effective range of 130 yards.

You know, I see people bringing up how LotC is based or loosely inspired by LotR as an argument for not having guns, and yet even back when the server had only just opened its doors in 2011 dwarves and humans had cannons going on.

The Adunians and I believe to some extent the Dwarves back in Anthos would perform drills involving the digging of trenches and construction of nests from which they’d shoot arbalests and repeater crossbows at their enemies, a tactic that was actually employed in a few battles at the time.

All of you need to grab google and start reading on what constitutes an actual Medieval Fantasy, why Fantasy as a genre has medieval aesthetics as a staple, how many mainstream fantasy role-play systems include firearms, and when firearms were first introduced in the west altogether. Gunpowder Artillery is a medieval technology. It was introduced in the 13th century in Europe in the form of siege cannons and hand-held cannons, and later matchlock rifles. The middle ages ended in the mid to late 15th century. It is perfectly consistent with a “Medieval Vibe”. What you are all trying to argue is that you don’t personally want guns in the setting because you don’t like them and because you prefer an earlier medieval aesthetic (reminder that the Middle Ages lasted 10 centuries), and there’s nothing wrong with that. But please, stop perpetuating this ludicrous notion that firearms break the themes of the server simply because you are incognizant about the genre and tropes intrinsic to it, or choose to ignore the reality that they are compatible with the Medieval themes, even if they were only a part of it towards the end in our world’s history.

I don’t know why but reading this comment made me spit my tea. Thank you very much.

If you ask me, wanting to kill the big bad wolf as swiftly and efficiently as possible seems to be a perfectly reasonable objective for a monster hunter. As for the part about character development, speak for yourself and let each player determine that on their own.

So I’m noticing that there are those who want 13th and 14th century firearms because they are compatible with the “medieval fantasy” theme of the server and expand upon the setting in new and interesting ways, and then there’s those who think they’re going to be getting muskets from the 18th century and do firing lines.

Don’t forget, the ball hits the target and potentially punches through, creating a larger hole on the opposite end of the object it hit. This is entirely dependent on the kind of protection the user was wearing, but the possibility is there. Also, the damage would change depending on what material the projectiles are made out of in LotC.

Worst case scenario you can use slings like the Romans did, with bullet-shaped lead projectiles to pierce through plate armor all the same. Edit: Actually, a little quick research on the interwebs shows that they’d be just as effective as some 13th century firearms, save for the part where those guns could create a fist-sized hole on their way out of a body or surface they hit. All you need is a projectile of the right mass and shape which could even be stone or some metal, not necessarily lead, and a long enough spin radius with your throwing arm or sling staff. You can punch a nasty hole through 20 gauge steel that way. Since slings are safely covered within the current techlock, with the earliest surviving ones IRL dating back to 2500 BC, I don’t see what people are complaining about. They are quicker and easier to “reload”, far more accessible and cheap than firearms but noticeably more skill-demanding. As it stands, at least in practice, you’ve already got firearms in the setting. Have fun.

So far, I’ve seen people propose to limit firearms to early 13th and 14th century matchlocks and some early 17th century flintlocks, the latter of which appear to be the point of contention and source of most of people’s concerns. However, I’ve also seen the majority of those opposing the introduction of firearms to lack an understanding of not only what the differences between High Fantasy, Historical (aka. Medieval) Fantasy and Low Fantasy are, or that firearms are a medieval weapon that is therefore compatible most fantasy sub-genres, not to mention already featured prominently in some of the staple fantasy role-playing games in the modern world. To this we can add a lack of understanding of the capabilities and intricacies of archery, crossbows and said medieval firearms. You can’t have a proper discourse unless all those involved are properly informed on the subject matter. Personally, I’ve tried to contribute in that department. Where is the mud slinging in that?

I agree with the lack of a census on the topic, so long as people continue to be misinformed and base their arguments on a lack of understanding of the relevant terminologies, objects of debate, literature, history, and fantasy sub-genres. There have been many instances in this thread of a common ground being attempted to be established by contributing information so people know what’s up. I don’t think it’s all “shitty opinions”. Edit: Rather, saying they’re shitty opinions is a disservice to the on-going discussion.

But see, firearms are a medieval technology.

They started to go extinct when rifling and more developed muskets became a thing. I believe the point of no return would be flintlock technology, but since flint and steel are a thing already it’s hard to lock those out should firearms be allowed with only matchlock.

This would be a more accurate demonstration of different types of crossbows being fired at a proper piece of plate armor.

Careful with the Slippery Slope. Also, make sure you’ve got the terminology down to a tee. Is it a High Fantasy server or a Medieval Fantasy server? Because Medieval Fantasy as a genre (otherwise known as Historical Fantasy) has it as a signature trait to lean on the side of realism by employing our historical middle ages as a basis for referencing everything from technology, culture, society to mythology. By the technicality of its definition, Lord of the Craft would continue to be a Medieval Fantasy, if not become even more of one, by including early medieval firearms in the setting. Edit: To this I should probably add that medieval aesthetics are a staple of most fantasy sub-genres. What people commonly think of as “Medieval Fantasy” is often High Fantasy, while Medieval Fantasy proper could be referring to Historical Fantasy or Low Fantasy – both of which Lord of the Craft is most assuredly not.

Not to mention we have a moderation team whose job description covers the handling of such situations.