Reactions to the Witch Subguilds

[Harmless]

They ARE different, they DO have different spells. This is true both OOC and IC. It is both the code, and the "reality" of the game world.

A master pianist I hear playing Mozart might not, in my mind, also be able to play jazz.

To me, he's still a pianist and I really don't know what he can or can't play until he's doing it.

Feels like guild-sniffing to me. "Oh, he cast X so I know he doesn't have Y."

When the reality is that I don't know that the guy I just saw fly away can't also nuke me with a fireball.

I will respond to this. Yes, they are both pianists. But to those who employ pianists, it is very important if they can play Mozart versus Jazz. Like, the use is not even the same at all. So you're basically agreeing with us.

As for "He cast X so I know he can't..." that's maybe a level of knowledge that one COULD apply after seeing at least four or five examples of the elementalists so you know that there might actually be such patterns. But I think it makes much more sense that such level of guessing is totally OOC at this point, since there's no way any one character could have experienced multiple examples of any given element's aspects to recognize the pattern this soon after they were released.

The same would be my response to Nauta. I believe nearly no one should ICly be aware of the exact aspects, or that there even are aspects, of any given element. That'd be a tremendous logical leap. Instead, what should be apparent to those who interact with magickers by now are more along the lines of what Lizzie described in this post.

[Hauwke]

I do see your points guys. But at the same time, staff has said that the lore says the case is there is no difference. And unfortunately (or fortunate in some cases) They do have the very final say. We can debate this all day long but the thing is, it makes such a small difference that it just doesnt matter.

[Lizzie]

I do see your points guys. But at the same time, staff has said that the lore says the case is there is no difference. And unfortunately (or fortunate in some cases) They do have the very final say. We can debate this all day long but the thing is, it makes such a small difference that it just doesnt matter.

What you're claiming staff said, is unplayable. There exists no way to play around the fact that your Oash aide knew yesterday that the primary ability of ALL vivaduans is to make water - and now today she knows that not all vivaduans can make water. Did the entire semi-intelligent world suddenly develop a case of mass amnesia? What about all the Oash books, the templar tomes, everything involving the game world's history that has gone by the confident knowledge that all vivaduans can make water? How do you roleplay around suddenly not knowing this fact? CAN they all make water, and these select vivaduans have simply chosen not to persue the ability? Or has something changed? If the staff says nothing has changed, then ICLy - you have to treat these PCs as if they are choosing to behave differently than history has proven their "kind" has been capable of behaving. So when a templar orders your vivaduan to fill his waterskin, and you say you can't, he should treat the situation as though you are simply being obstinate and refusing to obey a templar.

Is that how it should be? I don't think it is.

It has -not- always been how it is. The game world reflects this fact, unless the staff has gone through every single book in every single library and every scrap of parchment and read the contents of each one to ensure that any references to "what mages can do" has been 100% retconned. Is this what the staff should be doing with their time? I don't think it is.

The only logical, practical, and playable solution is to accept that ICly - things ARE different. And RP that way. You can even point to that fallen star for IC "proof" of the fact of the change. The star came from the elemental planes, and ripped the seams of magickality, rendering each element into segments. Boom. IC explanation, easy peasy. But if the staff want to play it that there is no difference and we should RP as though there's no difference, then it's just one more reason for me to really dislike this change.

[Reiloth]

Unplayable is an extreme point of view. If it were unplayable, we wouldn't see anyone playing Magickers. We wouldn't see anyone playing Gemmed. This isn't the case.

[Lizzie]

Unplayable is an extreme point of view. If it were unplayable, we wouldn't see anyone playing Magickers. We wouldn't see anyone playing Gemmed. This isn't the case.

I'm not talking about mages being playable or not.  I'm referring specifically to the topic of this thread, from an IC perspective. *Reactions to the Witch Subguilds* - supposedly (according to Hawke) the staff says we're to treat the changes - not at all, ICly. As though there are no changes, as though this isn't a change at all. I say - this approach is not playable.

[Marauder Moe]

I assumed we were to treat it like sandwiches.

[Lizzie]

I assumed we were to treat it like sandwiches.

If magicks were completely removed, I'd say you're probably right. But unlike sandwiches, mages are still in the game. So you can't pretend ICly they never existed, because they did, and still do.

[wizturbo]

What you're claiming staff said, is unplayable. There exists no way to play around the fact that your Oash aide knew yesterday that the primary ability of ALL vivaduans is to make water - and now today she knows that not all vivaduans can make water. Did the entire semi-intelligent world suddenly develop a case of mass amnesia? What about all the Oash books, the templar tomes, everything involving the game world's history that has gone by the confident knowledge that all vivaduans can make water?

This kind of situation happens all the time.  Staff make policy changes, and you literally have to retcon what your character knows as truth.  What sucks is that not everyone gets the memo, and you have to roleplay this retcon with characters who don't realize the retcon exists, and they think you're insane or trying to pull one over on them.  With that said, I don't exactly have a solution for that kind of problem.  Asking staff to come up with some IC justification for every single change they want to make is unreasonable, mostly because communicating that IC justification to everyone would be nearly impossible short of telling the entire playerbase something they maybe shouldn't know to begin with.

Anyway, that's not actually what happened here.  There are full elementalists.  There are full sorcerers.  Drovians, Elkrosians and Nilazi all exist.  You'll just never see one that isn't a staff animation or a legacy PC.  So you're supposed to pretend these things exist in the world.  If you're in the know about what Nilazi are and what they can do, you're supposed to actively suspect people of being one, even though OOCly you know that's not going to be the case.

It's a pretty twisted way to play, but I'm happy with it, because taking these things out of the game would be a coffin nail on the issue which I seriously hope is still something that may be reversed because the game is less fun with these changes.  It's really that simple to me.  I like Armageddon about half as much as I did before the removal of these guilds.  For me, their removal took away far more than the addition of the subguild options added back in.   I know there are players out there who probably like the game twice as much now that magick is a pale shadow of it's former self...  Whether that's a net positive or a net negative is something I can only speculate on. 

[Marauder Moe]

I assumed we were to treat it like sandwiches.

If magicks were completely removed, I'd say you're probably right. But unlike sandwiches, mages are still in the game. So you can't pretend ICly they never existed, because they did, and still do.

My point is all that's being asked is a bit of willful ignorance.  Have your character look the other way if they encounter an inconsistency and simply not raise a stink about it.  It's not that big of a deal.  We do it all the time.

(That said, I think the new subguilds are a great option but I feel like the original guilds probably still have a place and a need in the world.)

[Akaramu]

Is that really what's being asked, though? As far as I understand, full mages really do still exist ingame. At least that's what I gathered from the various staff posts / announcements.

[Lizzie]

Is that really what's being asked, though? As far as I understand, full mages really do still exist ingame. At least that's what I gathered from the various staff posts / announcements.

According to the help file they don't. http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Magick%20Aspect

The result is that no one elementalist is able to bring all of their element's power to bear and two elementalists of the same element may share little, if any, of the same abilities.

[KankWhisperer]

Staff should hold a massive player determined quest for each element to decide if they return to the old way or are forever changed to the new way. I'm tired of the disgusting magick lovers whining about it. Let it be decided! Even bring back some special app Tulukis to fight on factions side as they all battle to open or close <redacted>.

[Raptor_Dan]

Saying one krathi can do something, and another can't feels like this, to me:


"I know he can greb food, and I know he make knives, thus, he can't sew."
or
"You can't poison a weapon? I guess you'll never be able to, then."

I don't think either line should ever be used in armageddon. I haven't read an argument here yet that would convince me otherwise.

[Delirium]

I'm starting to think that mages should get most if not all of the original spells - but be capped at a low level for their "non focus" spells. Yuqa or kral, max. That way they're less easily "subguild sniffed" but can't use non-focus spells without a lot of effort and definitely not with much skill / ability. They're just not attuned enough to that side of their element.

[Reiloth]

I'm starting to think that mages should get most if not all of the original spells - but be capped at a low level for their "non focus" spells. Yuqa or kral, max. That way they're less easily "subguild sniffed" but can't use non-focus spells without a lot of effort and definitely not with much skill / ability. They're just not attuned enough to that side of their element.

I'd be down with dat.

[wizturbo]

I'm starting to think that mages should get most if not all of the original spells - but be capped at a low level for their "non focus" spells. Yuqa or kral, max. That way they're less easily "subguild sniffed" but can't use non-focus spells without a lot of effort and definitely not with much skill / ability. They're just not attuned enough to that side of their element.

There are a fair number of spells with strictly binary outcomes, I think there'd be some balance issues here.  Honestly, the subguilds don't seem like the problem to me.  They seem pretty cool and balanced for what they are, which is a mundane guild with a taste of magick.  I just would like to see full elementalists reintroduced for people who would prefer a non-hybrid role.  And just as much as that, I would like to see Drov and Nilaz reintroduced into the game...  Elkros too for that matter, but I'll admit that's a distant third for me and the least developed of the three guilds that were removed.

[Reiloth]

I'd be glad to never see Drovians return, and Elkrosians for that matter. Nilazi, i'd love to see return in some sort of Subguild format.

The only way i'd like to see Drovians return is if the Ethereal Plane and other dangers involved with traveling there are introduced. Otherwise it's just a zero sum game, always in the favor of the Drovian.

[Delirium]

Saying one krathi can do something, and another can't feels like this, to me:


"I know he can greb food, and I know he make knives, thus, he can't sew."
or
"You can't poison a weapon? I guess you'll never be able to, then."

I don't think either line should ever be used in armageddon. I haven't read an argument here yet that would convince me otherwise.

In general, players are going to know a lot about what guilds can and can't do, but characters should never make assumptions. And for all you know as a player, you could be interacting with a special app that can do things out of the norm.

Think outside the box more when you represent your PC to the world and things will generally feel a lot more seamless.

[Synthesis]

I think it might be reasonable to allow every aspect to eventually branch into every spell for an element, but only if it were done in such a way that out-of-aspect branches were VERY slow to improve.  So at 60 days or so, you might be "fully" branched.

Eventually, you could be uber...but you'd have to REALLY want it, and play all your cards right for a very long time.

[Hauwke]

Pretty sure there was an announcement concerning what I have said. If you wish for confirmation on either side Lizzie I suggest you look for it.

[Rathustra]

Staff posts on the topic of how these changes are felt IC:

What is the IC explanation for these changes?
These changes are only being marked OOCly. Nothing monumental has changed in the game world - there will be no spectacular shift or RPT to mark this change. Whether or not your PC notices any change should be down to what they encounter IC and based on their IC knowledge of elemental magick. You are free to have your character respond in a way consistent with the IG world and their individual personality if they notice anything.

I am concerned about certain aspects of this change and how they fit in with magickal theme, or whether particular aspects of game theme/history have been considered - where can I check up on this stuff?
Please submit a question request and we can talk it through. Given the sensitive IC nature of the game's magickal theme, handling such discussions through a request would be ideal.

The overall results have been exactly what we had hoped. People are playing a wide variety of magicker concepts and these concepts are usually pushed forward through the PC's primary guild, instead of entirely revolving around their magickal abilities.

The coolest thing has been watching people explore the new guilds and keeping an eye on the progress of players who are known for particularly long-lived PCs trying them out.

I think it is too early to get a feel for the effect these changes will have on the game as a world. But the changes in terms of the played, mechanical game, have not yet thrown up anything unexpected.

((Regarding 'krath-touched' being a subguild name and an IC term)).

Given that these changes and this class of magicker is entering the game naturally - as in, they are emerging after existing for a period of time, or are being born now. The names that are ascribed to them are up to players. 'Touched' is just how we've named them from an OOC perspective.

I'm curious as to if this will actually be an ic event or change.
Such as
"Magick is leaving the world in tiny bits but not really"
Or if it's just a completely pure OOC change of "People might notice IC eh, probably not"


I feel like theres some fancy plot potential there if its the actual ic thing, but the minute someone confirms it everyone and their mother would notice.

Consider a real-world scenario where a teacup is observed orbiting pluto in the readout from a fly-by satellite. It's down to the people on earth to react to this phenomena in a way that makes sense for them and they can deliberate and experiment as much as they want from their remote location. The chances of anyone ever coming to a proper conclusion, however, is remote.

To be less obnoxious - this change will be experienced IC. But we hope/expect players to have their PCs react and explore it in an IC way that makes sense for their PC. If you tell Vennant "hey barkeep I heard magickers are different now" he'll either not care, not believe you or throw you out. Similarly, consider that OOC knowledge of "guilds" and "spell trees" are only know IC as far as people (who lack the scientific method, are unreliable actors and are steeped in superstition) can experience them. The signal to noise ratio on what magickers could ever do, or what magick is should be such that for the vast, vast majority of people - it doesn't matter.

So if you're currently playing a full elementalist, does this mean that your PC is now some sort of magickal savant?

OOCly? Sort of. ICly? Your character can only make this assessment when they encounter something to suggest it. They will feel no IC change after this update!

Also, will there be any change to Gemmed?  I mean, if he looks and acts like a ranger, he's gonna be harder to figure out unless he tells you he's a whatever.

I'm not sure what you mean. If someone is able to hide their nature, that's an IC situation.

Fair enough.  Are we supposed to just act like this is how it's always been?  Because this an ooc change?  And what are the current mages considered in the realm of conversation?  Since they are more than all the other groupings.

I still think I'm not sure 100% what you're asking. But I think you're asking whether PCs should notice that magickers are suddenly able to do stuff (mundane stuff) that magickers couldn't do before. In that situation I'd advise 'acting like it's always been that way' - because the magicker guild's inability to fight was a coded limitation - there was no reason, using game-wold logic, why a magicker was crap at mundane tasks.

So when you find out Amos the Bynner who was super good at rough circle is a gemmer, you shouldn't be surprised - because gickers can be anyone. Not just the weaklings.

[Hauwke]

Ok, I think I was a little off on my understanding, Thank you for clearing it up Rath.

[Akaramu]

Yeah, thanks Rathustra! That helps.

Staff should hold a massive player determined quest for each element to decide if they return to the old way or are forever changed to the new way. I'm tired of the disgusting magick lovers whining about it. Let it be decided! Even bring back some special app Tulukis to fight on factions side as they all battle to open or close <redacted>.

Those 'disgusting magick lovers' populate your game. If all of them left, you might be looking at 20 players during high peak hours max. Let people have their fun, I say. Let's bring player numbers back up. The magick system was one of the main draws Armageddon MUD had over other RPI MUDs. I remember more than one veteran saying they came here for the magick.

[Lizzie]

Thanks Rathustra, I'm glad I was understanding it all correctly but couldn't find the thread where it was being discussed (I was checking on and off yesterday for the announcement from staff but didn't use search, I used page-turns, ooof).

So - my point stands. It is this "characters CAN notice, depending on whether or not it's IC for your character to notice, that there IS something different" that grates on my nerves, because there is no IC explanation for what happened, and yet your character is expected to react to the change, if/when appropriate. Mage characters living in the temple WOULD ABSOLUTELY KNOW that something is different between their character and the NPCs who have lived there all their lives (because those NPCs are full-guild mages). The templars who oversee those temple-based mages would absolutely know. And anyone those templars talk to about this situation would absolutely know. And so would Oash nobles who have grown up amongst mages enough to see that there is a difference between the ones who served the nobles before them, and the ones they're trying to hire now. And so would anyone those nobles talk to about the situation.

And yet - there exists no IC explanation, because the staff has decided there will be no IC explanation.

[Miradus]

And yet - there exists no IC explanation, because the staff has decided there will be no IC explanation.

I'm content with that for now because the minute there's an IC explanation ... guild gicks aren't coming back.