Layment Guilds - Deaths

[Laurel]

Huge xp loss for leaving Blademasters aswell, I agree layman should not be that costly.

is there really? last Laurel left BMs she suffered no loss ...? militia on the contrary ...

[Cherek]

I like it that there are different types of layman guilds too.

Both with and without penalty, both walk up and join and application. I like diversity. I like that there are plenty of them with different abilities. All guilds the same with different names... that sounds boring to me.

Layman guilds are not "just a hobby" for everyone, some people like to RP their layman instead of their OCC, (Which is why mercs are such a good OCC guild imho). So I dont mind some guilds have application process either. Most are walk up and join, but for those who want something else than just another special attack, there are places to go.

[Makfly]

I like it that there are different types of layman guilds too.

Both with and without penalty, both walk up and join and application. I like diversity. I like that there are plenty of them with different abilities. All guilds the same with different names... that sounds boring to me.

Layman guilds are not "just a hobby" for everyone, some people like to RP their layman instead of their OCC, (Which is why mercs are such a good OCC guild imho). So I dont mind some guilds have application process either. Most are walk up and join, but for those who want something else than just another special attack, there are places to go.

You open up for the whole discussion on whether or not (layman) guilds should be balanced against each other, or the old system with vastly different guild-tax should determine the power of a guild.
If all guilds should be balanced against each other, then it must be assumed that what they offer is equally useful, although the abilities may be different.
If that's the case, then the punishment for leaving should also be equal, and perhaps also the difficulty in joining.

But if you think that guilds should be at different powerlevels, and not be balanced against each other, then atleast the punishment should be more in line with the actual benefits of being a member, right?

I guess the main problem is that the guild-recode is still far from finished, and hopefully once each and every guild have gone through a recode, things would even out a bit more.


Also...Nobody is, or have been, arguing for make all layman guilds the same but with a different name, so I don't know why you argue against that.

[Cherek]

Makfly: Well there has been lots of talk about that lately, giving everyone similar abilities. Evils want rescue/movebehind and heal for instance. Guess I am a little bit tired of it... but you are right nobody said that here.

Anyway, yeah I think guilds should be balanced against eachother. With similar "power", but in different ways. That is what balance is to me.

But does application process or death penalty has anything to do with balance? Should they get more "power" because they have that? I think not. It is very hard to balance a "once only" payment. But if you really want to balance it, you would have to add a "once only" reward that equals the penalty. Getting more power than most for the rest of your time playing just because you have a hard application process is to me very bad balance. MM is the perfect example of this imho. They have a hard time applying/gaining the titles, but once they do they are vastly more powerful than everyone else? Not good balance... Same with death penalty, it is something you pay once, (if ever, you may not leave at all), and should not mean you get permanent powers for it.

Applications are most for RP I think, go through application and get rewarded with some RP and maybe a guild community feeling. Thats how I feel about it.

Some guilds have death penalty as part of its theme. Is it so odd that if you betray thieves you are killed? Makes sense to me. Does it mean they should have long term more powerful abilities than other guilds? I dont think so.

To me, the reason for some layman guilds having death penalty is the same as why many OOC have it. To keep people from guild hopping too much.

Allthough I am totally for the suggestion about a "buyout" option in all guilds that have a death penalty. Dragonarmy and Militia could have the honorable discharge once you reach a certain title or has spent a certain time in the guild or something, thieves could have some type of bribe system, etc.

That way the guilds with death penalty still keep people from guild hopping around, but for those who are tired of their guild choice and want to try something new, there is a way out.

[Kitriana]

which brings us to the point of.. ---> Who cares if you are guildhopping laymen guilds. Its your laymen guild.

[Freya]

Cherek,

As usual I get the impression we're playing diffrent games completely.


I am with Kit on this one, whats the harm if someone guild hops between a few layman guilds?

To be honest, I think leaving any guild should cost less, lets face it not everyone has the time/will
to spend the time it takes to recover. And if your not on a team doing the top notch xp grounds, recovering
from a death still takes quite a while.

I think that leaving occ guilds should be cut in half from what it costs now, and layman guilds should be free
to leave. I think changing these things would open up the game a bit more, perhaps a few old myths would
return to the game if they felt that they could change things up a bit guild-wise, without having to spend the
next 6 months grinding and grinding.


Lets be honest, how many people have any of you seen, guildhopping of late? There might be a handful of players
would like to change things up every 6months or so, but usually these players roleplay it rather well and actually
manage to get into new guilds.


It seems most mortals agree that it should cost less to leave a guild, but what do you, the immortals, think
about all this? While Gorboth mentioned in another thread that death should still be a something costly(Cherek's
talk of losing a fanta at a pkill is lame), and I agree, just that I think it should be a bit less costly to switch guilds.

[Cherek]

Kitriana: Well some do care... thieves used to be a very closed and secret society which was very hard to join, and also I think the penelty to leave also makes perfect sense as you betray the secrecy of the thieves. Elementals today have a lengthy application process and value RP. Pirates used to do as well. (Dont know if they still). Shieldbearers are closely tied to Neidars, even controlled by the occupational guild. Any some people also uses mercs for OCC skills but RP their layman as their "main" guild.

So its not "just your layman" for everyone. Maybe you see it like that, but not everyone does.

But for a walk up and join layman death penalty seems abit much I agree.

But I think the "buyout/honorable discharge" option would fit almost all guilds and is a good idea.

[Kitriana]

I guess I just have a very very different philosophy of where I feel laymen guilds should be in terms of RP. And I've never been a fan of laymen guilds being "attached/affiliated" to occupational guilds.

[Cherek]

Guess we do have different views on it. But thats why I like there are both "casual" layman options as well as more RP-serious ones. The majority are "casual" but still its free for anyone to RP as much little as they want. Most people use Thornlin Militia as another special attack and thats fine, but I could decide to be a polearm merc and join them and play them as my "main" guild. Protecting the area and generally RPing being in the militia.

I like we have free options to create our character. And I like there are different types of layman guilds too.

[Kitriana]

I don't really think there are enough laymen options. I am sadly not really happy with any of the possibilities available to me. Many of them are too "restraining" in their RP to allow occupational guilds with stronger RP to join comfortably or with any real satisfaction. Then again.. I might feel differently if we had a laymen and or racial option in Sybarus. Wishful thinking...