Genesis Forums

The biggest problem, both from my view now and my view from the time I was a Knight, is the huge penalties goodaligned guilds have to cope with, compared to the lack of such, in most evil guilds.

Knights are penalised whenever they kill anything goodaligned. Not just in their own alignment, but other guild aspects also.
Rangers are prohibited, as far as i know, from teaming with anyone evil.
Neidar lose some abilities when becoming evil. (while the other two are probably throwing out their members, or something)

Meanwhile the evil population can kill anything and everything in the game, never meeting a single issue, unless they have become too good and try to enter somewhere like Minas Morgul. The guilds themselves doesn't care, for the most part.

I would love to see a way where these things could become more even, so being goodaligned doesn't have to mean that you can kill only half the NPCs in the game, and can't team with most of the "neutral" people in the game, which probably have become evil from killing all the easy access goodie NPCs.

I love the Knighthood as a theme. I loved my time there, but at the end of my time it seemed to be to become a band of mercenaries on horseback, which had nothing to do with what I joined or wanted from my guild.
So I did the best betrayal I could and became a Priest of Takhisis instead.

Interesting thread. Although I am leaning more towards Cot's line of thinking.

And I think people need to go back and re-read the Dragonlance Chronicles before dictating what the knights should be.

Now that I am on the podium though, and more active in this space, talking about the knights and their factual issues - such as their declining numbers as outlined in the State of the Donut - is something worth spending virtual ink on.

There has been some discussions in wiz ranks about making changes to a few of the Krynn/Ansalon guilds. One I was tossing up was removing join restrictions for squires for the knights, and getting rid of the Grand Master position (not sure its purpose.. and it was a vacant position largely through most of the War of the Lance until Gunthar took it up). Keep it a tri-factional group as outlined in the books.

Another was looking at all the occ combat guilds in Krynn and seeing if the balance between the warring factions is right. We might make some tweaks to a few to even things up on the playing field.

Thoughts?

Arman wrote:Interesting thread. Although I am leaning more towards Cot's line of thinking.

And I think people need to go back and re-read the Dragonlance Chronicles before dictating what the knights should be.

Now that I am on the podium though, and more active in this space, talking about the knights and their factual issues - such as their declining numbers as outlined in the State of the Donut - is something worth spending virtual ink on.

There has been some discussions in wiz ranks about making changes to a few of the Krynn/Ansalon guilds. One I was tossing up was removing join restrictions for squires for the knights, and getting rid of the Grand Master position (not sure its purpose.. and it was a vacant position largely through most of the War of the Lance until Gunthar took it up). Keep it a tri-factional group as outlined in the books.

Another was looking at all the occ combat guilds in Krynn and seeing if the balance between the warring factions is right. We might make some tweaks to a few to even things up on the playing field.

Thoughts?

Please do something about the kenders!
And I don't think making it easier to join will solve anything. It will bring people with no idea about the guild and they will join for skills. Like mercs, glads or DAs.
I have always felt that it is more important to manage to create a place that you have to work to be able to join but also feel that it was worth joining it. And yes, I personally think it should be 100% acceptable for any guild leader to punish members for lack or rp but that I am probably the only one that wants.

Sounds like an excellent idea.

Balance between guilds is surely one of the most important things there is.

Arman wrote:Interesting thread. Although I am leaning more towards Cot's line of thinking.

And I think people need to go back and re-read the Dragonlance Chronicles before dictating what the knights should be.

Now that I am on the podium though, and more active in this space, talking about the knights and their factual issues - such as their declining numbers as outlined in the State of the Donut - is something worth spending virtual ink on.

There has been some discussions in wiz ranks about making changes to a few of the Krynn/Ansalon guilds. One I was tossing up was removing join restrictions for squires for the knights, and getting rid of the Grand Master position (not sure its purpose.. and it was a vacant position largely through most of the War of the Lance until Gunthar took it up). Keep it a tri-factional group as outlined in the books.

Another was looking at all the occ combat guilds in Krynn and seeing if the balance between the warring factions is right. We might make some tweaks to a few to even things up on the playing field.

Thoughts?

Just wrote about automation of joining process (or part of it at least) and asked if there's need for GM position (i have mixed feelings myself)

Balance...that's probably bigger than just simple comparison of Dragonarmies vs Knights vs Neidar etc.
Why BDA is so strong now (not mentioning their current playerbase of best pvpers in gen ofc):
- the guild itself is strong of course, but also!
- goblin race is just OP
- Swords are prolly best weapon to use nowadays (that's first reason why BDA > RDA)
- They have great synergy with layman guilds - BM for pure power, AA for being ultimate solo-force (another reason why BDA > RDA)

And anyone doing some balancing work need to remember bout such issues

Of course if you want some kind of help etc let me know.

Arman wrote:Interesting thread. Although I am leaning more towards Cot's line of thinking.

And I think people need to go back and re-read the Dragonlance Chronicles before dictating what the knights should be.

Now that I am on the podium though, and more active in this space, talking about the knights and their factual issues - such as their declining numbers as outlined in the State of the Donut - is something worth spending virtual ink on.

There has been some discussions in wiz ranks about making changes to a few of the Krynn/Ansalon guilds. One I was tossing up was removing join restrictions for squires for the knights, and getting rid of the Grand Master position (not sure its purpose.. and it was a vacant position largely through most of the War of the Lance until Gunthar took it up). Keep it a tri-factional group as outlined in the books.

Another was looking at all the occ combat guilds in Krynn and seeing if the balance between the warring factions is right. We might make some tweaks to a few to even things up on the playing field.

Thoughts?

As long as Neidars are consider as tank guild, we should have something like Calians, but opposite. We dont hide behind someone backs, but we stand in front line and we focus enemies on us and others are behind us, so they cant be re-attack. I dont know why, noone thought about it during recode, but it is good feature for tanker guild with no dmg, especially in PvP.

Arcon wrote:

Arman wrote:Interesting thread. Although I am leaning more towards Cot's line of thinking.

And I think people need to go back and re-read the Dragonlance Chronicles before dictating what the knights should be.

Now that I am on the podium though, and more active in this space, talking about the knights and their factual issues - such as their declining numbers as outlined in the State of the Donut - is something worth spending virtual ink on.

There has been some discussions in wiz ranks about making changes to a few of the Krynn/Ansalon guilds. One I was tossing up was removing join restrictions for squires for the knights, and getting rid of the Grand Master position (not sure its purpose.. and it was a vacant position largely through most of the War of the Lance until Gunthar took it up). Keep it a tri-factional group as outlined in the books.

Another was looking at all the occ combat guilds in Krynn and seeing if the balance between the warring factions is right. We might make some tweaks to a few to even things up on the playing field.

Thoughts?

Please do something about the kenders!
And I don't think making it easier to join will solve anything. It will bring people with no idea about the guild and they will join for skills. Like mercs, glads or DAs.
I have always felt that it is more important to manage to create a place that you have to work to be able to join but also feel that it was worth joining it. And yes, I personally think it should be 100% acceptable for any guild leader to punish members for lack or rp but that I am probably the only one that wants.

Then you will need to increase their power significantly. We have example of RP-super-heavy guild that doesn't reward effort afterwards - PoT. Go check Gorboth's note for their stats (and yes RP there is great and so on, but there are really just a few players who are playing for RP ONLY)

Let them change their stars, Ulric wore the tunic of a dihonoured, it means he wants to improve the Knighthood. I support it, and point out the bulletin board in Beggars Club, that might be the solution.

Berwyn

Arcon wrote:

Arman wrote:Interesting thread. Although I am leaning more towards Cot's line of thinking.

And I think people need to go back and re-read the Dragonlance Chronicles before dictating what the knights should be.

Now that I am on the podium though, and more active in this space, talking about the knights and their factual issues - such as their declining numbers as outlined in the State of the Donut - is something worth spending virtual ink on.

There has been some discussions in wiz ranks about making changes to a few of the Krynn/Ansalon guilds. One I was tossing up was removing join restrictions for squires for the knights, and getting rid of the Grand Master position (not sure its purpose.. and it was a vacant position largely through most of the War of the Lance until Gunthar took it up). Keep it a tri-factional group as outlined in the books.

Another was looking at all the occ combat guilds in Krynn and seeing if the balance between the warring factions is right. We might make some tweaks to a few to even things up on the playing field.

Thoughts?

Please do something about the kenders!
And I don't think making it easier to join will solve anything. It will bring people with no idea about the guild and they will join for skills. Like mercs, glads or DAs.
I have always felt that it is more important to manage to create a place that you have to work to be able to join but also feel that it was worth joining it. And yes, I personally think it should be 100% acceptable for any guild leader to punish members for lack or rp but that I am probably the only one that wants.

Kender (SS) are on the top of our list. However removing join restrictions will also be one of the first things we do... a difficult quest determining whether you can join or not isn't going to necessarily improve the roleplay of the SS.

And with the kender racial guild having no restrictions on joining, kenders wandering the realms out of character is a risk that already exists (and is a risk that exists not just with kender... Krynn minotaurs have as rich a roleplay background as kender, and have no join restrictions).

Something I like about guilds like for example Ogres and SS is that they both promote RP in the way they are coded. Yes, it's great when players take up excellent RP on their own, but it's also really nice when you get a nudge in the right direction. For most players RP is hard, and if the code can help a bit, that's good I think. I don't mean just emotes now. Ogres and SS kind of "forces" players to be play their roles whether they want to or not. It may sound bad to force players, but I think for most it's very helpful tools in order to RP better.

There are other guilds who do this quite well too, but perhaps not as clear as the above mentioned guilds, with ogres as the most clear example. I mean, who can play an ogre without feeling a bit stupid themselves after awhile?:) Now, in most guilds a lot will always be up to the players themselves on how they want to RP their guild, but I don't think it's a bad thing to include some things to nudge people in the "right" direction. In guilds that have a very clear role to play at least. That is of course up to the guildmaster to decide, if they want "RP-enhancing" code, or want to leave the guild completely open for players to do what they want with.

Personally as a player I always liked guilds that helped you out a bit with the RP. And the knights are actually a good example of the opposite, as a long member of the knights guild myself, "back in the days", the coded abilities of the knights kind of worked AGAINST the RP of the knights. Block can definitely be argued if it's a knightly ability, but I am talking mainly about "mercy". It sure sounds like a good and knightly ability, but it was just far to easy to knock goodies out to steal their stuff. Now, this was of course not allowed by the conclave, but as soon as the conclave was not looking people did it anyway, turning knights into thieves because it was just too tempting and rewarding to use the ability the wrong way. Later it was changes so you lost prestige when knocking goodies out, but it's still a good example of an ability that just made RP-ing your role harder, instead of easier.

And it's not only goodies who have these issues of being tempted to do anti-RP stuff. For example, putting very good items for specific guilds on their own guild NPCs always gives the players a problem. It's soooo tempting to kill your own guild NPCs for the item, yet you know it's super-poor RP. DAs and Mages used to (not sure if they still do) kill their own NPCs in order to get the EQ they wanted. Then of course try to "hide it" with some kind of RP reason of the NPC needing punishment or something.

Obviously, a better way to enhance RP would instead be to put that extra good DA item on a knight NPC, and vice versa, instead of tempting players to kill off their own NPCs. Same goes for some killing grounds. Let's take the DA's "training on trolls" as an example. They are supposed to protect Neraka, but trolls are obviously too good XP to pass on, so some sort of RP reasons needs to be invented so they can kill them. There are other guilds who cant attack their own troops, why not extend that ability to the DA too? That would help their RP, instead of tempt them to break it. And I am just using DA as example here, there's plenty of similar things in other guilds.

So to summarize, yes, players decide how much they want to RP or not, and what to do with their character, but we as wizards can also help encourage RP overall in the game, and in guilds that have been designed to play a specific role in the game. I believe that is helpful both for the player trying to RP that role, and for the game as a whole, because I do think Genesis should be a game where RP is encouraged, but RP does not come natural for everyone and if the technical aspects of the game also tempt you to break your RP, it becomes even harder.