The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Only validated game players have access in this forum. Use this forum to discuss guilds. Note that as a general rule, guild abilities should not be revealed.
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.

Should the Khiraa re-open 20+ years after the fact?

No, it would hurt the game!
16
47%
No, keep Genesis as it is, I'm afraid of change!
1
3%
Yes, this sounds like a good addition to Genesis and could induce future rejuvenation of the Raumdor-domain!
8
24%
Yes, any guild that encourages and enables teaming is a welcome and refreshing addition to the donut!
9
26%
 
Total votes: 34

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 763
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Arman » 23 Jan 2021 03:08

I am very anti hiding occ and lay guild titles, with the exception of rogue classes where it is thematically appropriate.

We are a text-based game. Titles and title progression are important at adding depth and distinction to a character. Choosing a layman guild should be more than just to maximise your combat output but also embracing that layman (racial/craft) theme and be part of your character.

Yes, I do get the point that some layman guilds just don't thematically align well with some occupational guilds, but to me that just reflects the lack of complimentary layman options for players.

User avatar
Zhar
Wizard
Posts: 1079
Joined: 17 Apr 2012 12:09

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Zhar » 23 Jan 2021 03:39

That's why I wasn't suggesting hiding the title but rather changing it slightly to be more thematically fitting. Like the "Goblinbane of Thornlin Militia" could turn into "Krougbane of Gelan Guard" when you're a Calian Warrior.

Obviously this should not work for all the guilds as some are pretty thematically heavy like Heralds of the Valar or Templars of Takhisis, but I can definitely see it working for simpler guilds like Militia or Blademasters for sure.
Time is precious. Waste it wisely.

User avatar
nils
Titan
Posts: 458
Joined: 22 Jul 2016 17:13

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by nils » 23 Jan 2021 05:20

Arman wrote:
23 Jan 2021 03:08
I am very anti hiding occ and lay guild titles, with the exception of rogue classes where it is thematically appropriate.

We are a text-based game. Titles and title progression are important at adding depth and distinction to a character. Choosing a layman guild should be more than just to maximise your combat output but also embracing that layman (racial/craft) theme and be part of your character.

Yes, I do get the point that some layman guilds just don't thematically align well with some occupational guilds, but to me that just reflects the lack of complimentary layman options for players.
A classic case of "Arman doesn't like hence it won't happen" and "Arman decides how you should play/experience the game".

Also a fine example of a very Genesis-way of thinking is "it reflects the lack of complementary layman options". While very true, the fix is pretty simple: While we wait for the complimentary layman options to appear (big job, takes years), let's just enable all laymans to hide their title (small job, takes a few hours) and once we think a sufficient number of layman guilds have appeared we'll just revert back to the old (Probably a question of backing up a couple files - 10 mins?).

I've said it several times before, I hate having to pick a layman/missing out of some sorely needed combat aid if I choose not to be a member of one. This very thing is what speaks in favour of the original topic of the thread, the Khiraa being both occ and layman while also offering melee for the magic haters.
Nil Mortifi Sine Lucre

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 763
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Arman » 23 Jan 2021 08:42

nils wrote:
23 Jan 2021 05:20
Arman wrote:
23 Jan 2021 03:08
I am very anti hiding occ and lay guild titles, with the exception of rogue classes where it is thematically appropriate.

We are a text-based game. Titles and title progression are important at adding depth and distinction to a character. Choosing a layman guild should be more than just to maximise your combat output but also embracing that layman (racial/craft) theme and be part of your character.

Yes, I do get the point that some layman guilds just don't thematically align well with some occupational guilds, but to me that just reflects the lack of complimentary layman options for players.
A classic case of "Arman doesn't like hence it won't happen" and "Arman decides how you should play/experience the game".

Also a fine example of a very Genesis-way of thinking is "it reflects the lack of complementary layman options". While very true, the fix is pretty simple: While we wait for the complimentary layman options to appear (big job, takes years), let's just enable all laymans to hide their title (small job, takes a few hours) and once we think a sufficient number of layman guilds have appeared we'll just revert back to the old (Probably a question of backing up a couple files - 10 mins?).

I've said it several times before, I hate having to pick a layman/missing out of some sorely needed combat aid if I choose not to be a member of one. This very thing is what speaks in favour of the original topic of the thread, the Khiraa being both occ and layman while also offering melee for the magic haters.
When the Genesis administration don't agree with your point of view Nils, yeah, you can say its a "classic case of your suggestion won't happen."

Personally, I think your suggestion is the lazy way out and detracts from the game.

User avatar
nils
Titan
Posts: 458
Joined: 22 Jul 2016 17:13

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by nils » 23 Jan 2021 09:32

Arman wrote:
23 Jan 2021 08:42
When the Genesis administration don't agree with your point of view Nils, yeah, you can say its a "classic case of your suggestion won't happen."

Personally, I think your suggestion is the lazy way out and detracts from the game.

Sometimes it's hard to know if it's the united voice of an administration or the result of the one-track mind of the person behind the handle. You, personally, may ofcourse disagree - but if you, personally, get the final say for the sole reason of the matter at hand being your personal view then it warrants critique. Which surely you, personally, should see the wisdom in.

As for lazy, yes - that we agree on. It is! Making more layman guilds is certainly the noble and just path! But, although there's an increase in active wizards according the the recent State of the Donut, the common reply to any request, big or small, is always rooted in 'lack of manpower' and/or 'wiz and (get refused to) code it yourself' which brokers the need.. nay, demand for simpler, albeit crude and temporary, solutions.

Personally, I see no problem in providing additional options such as the possibility to hide your affiliations. In fact, it's pretty realistic - it's not like we wear non-removable badges in real life, do we? Surely you have one persona at home, and another at work? Maybe even a third if a social situation demands it?

Also, if Frodo and Sam can pose as orcs (and hide their affiliation with the Shire) in order to fail at sneaking into Mordor...
orcfrodosam-1.jpg
orcfrodosam-1.jpg (82.2 KiB) Viewed 2497 times
...why is it so damn important that we, the players of this magnificent game, are denied the freedom of choice, as the very existence of choice enriches a character. I mean, if a visible warlock-title is electable, surely the one opting to display it is making a very different statement than he or she does now. when it's forced?

Choice good. Force bad.
Nil Mortifi Sine Lucre

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 763
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Arman » 23 Jan 2021 12:25

nils wrote:
23 Jan 2021 09:32
Sometimes it's hard to know if it's the united voice of an administration or the result of the one-track mind of the person behind the handle. You, personally, may ofcourse disagree - but if you, personally, get the final say for the sole reason of the matter at hand being your personal view then it warrants critique. Which surely you, personally, should see the wisdom in.
Whether it is my sole view or the view of the administration as a whole, I don't have a problem with either of our views being open to critique. Critique isn't something we control, and the player population certainly is not shy in sharing their opinions and suggestions.

Some critiques hold weight with us (individually or collectively) and influence our discussions and decision making. Other don't.

When it comes to this topic, a while ago a certain layman guild was coded initially with an incognito. After discussion by the admin it was in united agreement that incognito should be sparingly used in the game largely for the reasons I gave previously. Not common, certainly not a default.
nils wrote:
23 Jan 2021 09:32
...why is it so damn important that we, the players of this magnificent game, are denied the freedom of choice, as the very existence of choice enriches a character. I mean, if a visible warlock-title is electable, surely the one opting to display it is making a very different statement than he or she does now. when it's forced?

Choice good. Force bad.
Why have any rules, boundaries or parameters? You could argue the same about questing. About character descriptions. About brute. About racial restrictions and benefits. Name restrictions. Who you can and can't remember. Who lists. Why have layman guilds at all? Or occupational guilds? Why not have a smorgasbord of specials and just give the players the freedom of how they want to set up their character?

Genesis is a sandbox, but it has never pretended to be free-form. Ever. There are boundaries and rules. As a game built in text with a preference for character thematics and narrative, there are elements to the game that won't allow complete player freedom. You will have to make choices. Choosing to be a Warlock, or a Worshipper, or a Raider comes with not just their powers but their titles and affiliations as well.

You don't like it, fair enough. But universal incognito isn't something viewed as enriching the game.

User avatar
Redblade
Adept
Posts: 112
Joined: 10 Aug 2020 18:51

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Redblade » 23 Jan 2021 13:02

Zhar wrote:
23 Jan 2021 03:39
That's why I wasn't suggesting hiding the title but rather changing it slightly to be more thematically fitting. Like the "Goblinbane of Thornlin Militia" could turn into "Krougbane of Gelan Guard" when you're a Calian Warrior.

Obviously this should not work for all the guilds as some are pretty thematically heavy like Heralds of the Valar or Templars of Takhisis, but I can definitely see it working for simpler guilds like Militia or Blademasters for sure.
While I originally liked the idea, I must say:
1) I realised I likely agree with Arman.
2) The example you used struck very close to home for me. I realised that if you changed Militia to have such titles then all sense of the Militia brothers-in-arms (and sisters of course) and the comradery of Militia, that we often could base good friendships on back in the day when Militiamen would actually meet and go hunting together, this would disappear for me. Suddenly they'd all be "Krougbane of Gelan Guard" and such and you would fully and completely lose the glimpse of theme we are to have as a guild: protecting Thornlin (not Gelan or the School).
nils wrote:
23 Jan 2021 09:32
Also, if Frodo and Sam can pose as orcs (and hide their affiliation with the Shire) in order to fail at sneaking into Mordor...
The game doesn't always work like the real world, or even the fictional world. Was it so, a skilled Ranger could fight off five nazguls with a sword and a torch without a scratch.
Auta i lómë, Aurë entuluva!
The Night is passing, Day shall come again!

Makfly
Champion
Posts: 615
Joined: 04 Mar 2010 00:36

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Makfly » 23 Jan 2021 14:04

Reading the previous posts from Arman and Cherek reminds me, why I stopped posting, not only because of the incredible conservatism that keep insisting not to manage Genesis as an actual game, but most of all the unwillingness to actually READ what is written in good faith, instead of picking at a corner of a message and inflating or twisting that, or as we have seen from Arman just now, use the age old slippery slope argument to sweep away ideas.

It's been said by many before, and said here again - Players have been told again and again, that there is a serious shortage of manpower, which is why many good ideas can never be realised.
But then at the same time when ideas that could be better, but is still a step in the right direction AND easy to realise is presented, they too are swept away because it's "lazy".

Just one last peep out of me, before I'll admit defeat again and stop posting, is simply to point to the other thread about layman guild ideas. Why have a warg rider guild in Middle Earth, when you can simply enable the Raiders to hide their title, and mix effortlessly with AA to create an OCC+Layman option concept that fulfills the desire to play the role of a warg riding goblin from the Misty Mountains.

If you want to promote avenues to roleplaying a more clean concept in an admittedly small way, but still better than nothing, consider this is suggestion.
If you want perfect to continue to be the enemy of the good, then keep on trucking.


*I get its worgs not wargs, but again, why let perfect be the enemy of good.
Mortimor Makfly - Gnomish Xeno-Anthropologist

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 763
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by Arman » 23 Jan 2021 15:12

Makfly wrote:
23 Jan 2021 14:04
Reading the previous posts from Arman and Cherek reminds me, why I stopped posting, not only because of the incredible conservatism that keep insisting not to manage Genesis as an actual game, but most of all the unwillingness to actually READ what is written in good faith, instead of picking at a corner of a message and inflating or twisting that, or as we have seen from Arman just now, use the age old slippery slope argument to sweep away ideas.
We embrace and implement lots of player suggestions and ideas, and have been willing to implement revolutionary changes to the game. Just because we don't agree on an idea doesn't make us incredibly conservative or unwilling to consider suggestions from players.
Makfly wrote:
23 Jan 2021 14:04
It's been said by many before, and said here again - Players have been told again and again, that there is a serious shortage of manpower, which is why many good ideas can never be realised.
But then at the same time when ideas that could be better, but is still a step in the right direction AND easy to realise is presented, they too are swept away because it's "lazy".
The idea isn't a step in the right direction. Regardless of manpower, it wouldn't be implemented.
Makfly wrote:
23 Jan 2021 14:04
Just one last peep out of me, before I'll admit defeat again and stop posting, is simply to point to the other thread about layman guild ideas. Why have a warg rider guild in Middle Earth, when you can simply enable the Raiders to hide their title, and mix effortlessly with AA to create an OCC+Layman option concept that fulfills the desire to play the role of a warg riding goblin from the Misty Mountains.
In some cases you can modify your titles to align with another guild theme. Smiths allow it, so does SoHM, and so do the elven archers... it really depends on the thematics of the guild. For some, they have a specific background and theme where you wouldn't have a cosmetic overlay, as Redblade flagged with the Thornlin Militia, or Heralds, or Warlocks, or Red Fang, or just about the majority of layman and racial guilds.

If there was a HUGE desire for orcs of Middle Earth to claim a unique title when aligned to the Raiders, I am not horribly opposed to that. But it hasn't really been raised as a big deal until now (if it is... I don't see many orcs or raiders... let alone a combination of both).

But let's face it. Genesis is not Middle Earth alone. Or Krynn. Or Avenir. One of its idiosyncrasies is it is a mishmash of themes and unique domains interwoven and linked, where players across those domains cross and interact with each other. And the guild and title system mirrors it.

User avatar
varian
Wizard
Posts: 30
Joined: 20 Aug 2015 01:32

Re: The rise of the Nameless Horror!

Post by varian » 23 Jan 2021 17:22

There is getting to be a lot to unpack here.

- Wizard manpower.

Please understand, wizards are volunteers. This isn't a paid job. Regardless of the opinion some people have of me, I do actually consult with mortals representing guilds my code would impact when I am in the design phase. For instance, I spoke with leaders of the AA and MM when I was building the various components of Cair Andros.

Why? Because I wanted to make sure that the content I thought Middle-Earth guilds needed more of would be available in Middle-Earth.

This doesn't mean that my code is universally loved or the 'best thing ever' for those guilds. I had multiple reasons for building the area, and those two guilds were only a part of the consideration. However, I did seek mortal feedback while I was in the design stage.

Why bring this up? Because I am a volunteer, I code the things I like coding. I'm not getting paid to do this, and that means I'm not beholden to the desires of others. Does someone want to see Dorwinion coded? Maybe there would be a huge popular push for it amongst mortals (there isn't, and I can't imagine why there ever would be... but let's play pretend). If there was someone who wanted to code it, as Liege of Middle-Earth I wouldn't stand in the way, so long as they kept close to the canon of Tolkien. Would I drop my existing projects and work on it? No. Not until I finished up everything else and had nothing better to do.

That's a lack of wizard manpower. It doesn't mean the work can't be done, it means (in the hypothetical Dorwinion example) I am not interested in doing it and I don't know anyone else interested either. Suggesting that people who volunteer their time to work on creative projects that they find fun and/or interesting should instead have to work on what certain groups of mortals demand instead... it's not realistic.

With enough mortal demand for certain code, the project likely becomes more interesting to various wizards. After all, we do want people to enjoy what we create. But, speaking for myself, I want to work on things that interest me first and foremost. If it interests others too, that's great. But this is my personal time I am volunteering, if it is spent only doing things I am not interested in, then I'm not likely to remain long in the project, or it is not going to be done to my standards.

- Hiding titles

I fully understand the desire behind this, but I don't personally think it is useful or practical for Genesis as a game-wide concept.

Guilds are built on concepts, they have a certain unifying theme. This is where their special abilities, the thing that makes them unique, come from. People suggested allowing the Thornlin Militia to adapt based on their occ guild... well, then it isn't a militia. But beyond that, their guildhall isn't in Gelan, as such, there is no reason to suggest that they should change their title to reflect being the militia or guard of some foreign city.

As a general rule, guilds in Genesis have a specific theme, not a generic one.

We don't have a nameless place to simply spend tax to get a standardized polearm special attack, or another to get a club special attack or another for axe. Even if guilds provide special attacks for these weapon types, they are not identical in their function of damage, cooldown, etc.. etc.. And this is not taking into consideration that they may often offer additional benefits such as skills or other abilities.

What does that mean? Well, if you want the specialized abilities that come from a theme, then you also get the title that goes with the theme. That is also a part of role-play.

To put it bluntly, you might not be so effective in battle and grinding, but you can go completely without titles just by having no guild affiliations if you believe the titles adversely affects your ability to role-play.

Yes... yes... I know that would create different problems in playability... but I'm just pointing out that nobody is forced to do anything they don't like. The discussion is revolving around what some individuals want to do, and the argument has turned into suggesting that they are forced in one fashion or another - when that simply isn't true. We just don't currently have the options they want.

Now, who knows, maybe a generic layman guild could be created. I don't see myself creating it, nor do I know any wizards off-hand would would be interested in creating it. But, perhaps it would be something with no start room or racks etc... etc... something you could just join/leave at any adventurer guild in Genesis. It would allow you to choose a weapon specialty and you could train that and defence up to superior journeyman and get a generic special attack with it. Maybe it would offer a choice of a domain (or even city?) title or no title. But it would have no list of members online, no guild bulletin board... nothing.

Would it be the best combat option available? Probably not. But it might provide a little boost for the tax, and maybe it would fill a void in the game? I really don't know. I honestly haven't spent a ton of time thinking about it.

But I think an idea like that has a better chance than lobbying for the option to remove theme from existing guilds.

Varian

Post Reply
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/