Mages Vs Mundanes.

[Fujikoma]

I would love for there to be more emphasis placed on people who are "buddies" with gemmed mages being ostracized and possibly, if not CERTAINLY investigated and almost always harassed by the authorities for their relations.

When I play a southern Allanaki Templar, you folks who are buddying it up with or even banging my gemmed slaves better expect to get some shit from me. Because it is coming and I will make sure my Arm underlings adapt the same mindset.

It would make people who are going to be buddies with mages do it in a private secure setting so that it stops appearing to be the norm in the middle of public commoner taverns.

All of you mages who sit around at the bar in the middle of these taverns and have discussions with each other and even other non-mages about what your magic powers can and can't do like it's a Jenny Craig support group for gickers etc...etc...etc....get ready, because when I play that Templar, your life is going to be shit.

There is also some fancy new code that I've seen in game that keeps certain people out of certain taverns. I wouldn't mind seeing that code adapted to check for gems. This would have not only the benefit of keeping them codedly "out" and away from "common people", it would also create a coded construct in game that would help create a socially accepted construct of truly ostracizing and separating that group.

When you have NPC's in place that do something openly, it becomes commonly accepted by the playerbase that, "This is the way the world works. Staff backs this entirely. I should be this way too.".

Haha, I think my biggest bitch was trying to get the militia to stop trying to force my gemmed breed gicker's mundane human girlfriend into service (where her life would have been heavily regulated, scheduled, scrutinized, and constantly at risk). It's been more than a year, so... yeah. He was always trying to tell her "Just tell them you got some elf inside you, is true!"

[Miko]

I'm curious, having never played a mage, but, um, sorta, well, let's just say, I've watched a lot of you with previous PCs from the shadows: Is it fun at all?  Do you basically just log in for RPTs and otherwise code up the skills in your temples alone?  Are there outlets for interaction that are satisfying?  I'm thinking here of the standard run, the gemmed mage in Allanak.  My hunch is that it would be terrible, the worst of both worlds, just slightly better than a city elf: you are isolated (-and- there are hardly any other PC mages to hang with) -and- treated as a tool.  You can go on those RPTs, but while everyone else is sitting around the campfire (YOU MADE) singing happy songs you get to go to the other room and be all alone and creepy, alone, by yourself, whispering the words to the song and watching Krath settle over the dunes, alone.  (Of course, such a PC would be fun in theory, but I doubt it'd be fun in practice, at least to me.)

being a mage has been the most fun I've had in arma to date. But.. I've played isolated, city-bound or whatever roles many times. I play lots of merchants and such and spend a lot of time in one place. So that helps a lot with my enjoyment. But yeah it's a lot of fun.

[CodeMaster]

When you have NPC's in place that do something openly, it becomes commonly accepted by the playerbase that, "This is the way the world works. Staff backs this entirely. I should be this way too.".

I don't have anything to add, but well said.  I hope you play a templar.

[wizturbo]

I would love for there to be more emphasis placed on people who are "buddies" with gemmed mages being ostracized and possibly, if not CERTAINLY investigated and almost always harassed by the authorities for their relations.

I agree, but I don't think the "authorities" should be the ones doing it.  Peer pressure seems more realistic.  

[Down Under]

Expanding on the code that is in place for entering taverns in Tuluk, requiring you to be a citizen at certain checkpoints...

For Gemmed, it'd be interesting if a bouncer didn't let them sit at the bar. There is a Gemmed table, over there. Segregation, rather than outright banning them from taverns.

[Fujikoma]

If a mage makes a significant social investment, they'll see a return. Not much of one, but even if they're not "people", you get back a small amount of what you put in. Magick plots can be fun, I mean, I'm not going to lie, the role is quite isolated, but when some doors are closed, others are opened.

[Eyeball]

This question is sort of pointless, given how mages have been marginalized to irrelevancy in practical terms.

[CodeMaster]

I would love for there to be more emphasis placed on people who are "buddies" with gemmed mages being ostracized and possibly, if not CERTAINLY investigated and almost always harassed by the authorities for their relations.

I agree, but I don't think the "authorities" should be the ones doing it.  Peer pressure seems more realistic.  

Why not, turbo?  I'll give you some reasons why the "authorities" [sic] should be among the ones doing it.

1) The authorities own the gemmed mages to begin with.  It's good parenting to know who your kids' friends are, and to discourage them from hanging out with bad influences.  2) Authority characters (like templars) also tend to be in positions of leadership, and serve as role models for the rest of the playerbase on an OOC level.

[BadSkeelz]

Both authorities and the populace at large can exert pressures on those who are friends with the Gemmed, but they don't have to do it for the same reasons.

[Is Friday]

If I play a psionist in the next few years all I will do with them is mind control NPCs to hate on mages.

[wizturbo]

Why not, turbo?  I'll give you some reasons why the "authorities" [sic] should be among the ones doing it.

1) The authorities own the gemmed mages to begin with.  It's good parenting to know who your kids' friends are, and to discourage them from hanging out with bad influences.  2) Authority characters (like templars) also tend to be in positions of leadership, and serve as role models for the rest of the playerbase on an OOC level.

1)  Absolutely keep an eye on your Gemmed.  Most Templars I've seen do.  If that Gemmed is doing shit they shouldn't be...such as scaring a bunch of commoners by talking about magick at the bar, by all means come down on them.  That's common sense.  But what exactly comes out of punishing the merchant who sold your gemmed a pair of boots, or the halfbreed whore that took their sid for a little fun.  Or the guy who had a conversation with them at the bar.  No laws were broken, no harm done, unless you're afraid of magick.   The commoners reaction to treat those mundanes with disdain seems perfectly logical.  "Why is so-and-so doing business with the 'gicker?  I'm not buying their boots anymore! "  etc...


2)  The nobles do a fantastic job of "leading the charge" when it comes to disdain for the Gemmed in most cases.  They're the ones that are supposed to be looked up to by the commoners, and are the puppets that the commoners believe control the city through the Senate.  You could argue the noble role's "job" is to create the social framework in their city.  The Templarate uses magick itself.  They're sorcery-wielding minions of the most terrible sorcerer in the world, they're hardly the best people to act as the poster children for anti-magick in Allanak.

It also creates an enormous catch-22 for the Templarate on an OOC level, if they're the ones trying to enforce anti-magickal social sentiment.  They're the ones that employ the Gemmed in most cases, so they're acting as the leadership for the Gemmed "clan" so to speak...  they're also supposed to be the ones that shit in their employees cereal every morning?  "I need you to do this horribly dangerous task for me. "  "Thanks!  Here's 100 sid.  Now go sit in your fucking hole and never let me see you talking to any mundanes.  You'd better not spend that 100 sid in a tavern either..."  How do you take on a leadership role like that?  Impossible to do and still have any fun for either the Gemmed or the Templar involved, unless some people are just in to masochistic roles like that.  

3)  Also, I don't know if you've ever played a Templar, but the role is filled with TONS of things you're supposed to enforce on a day to day.  You have to go run off and interrogate that pickpocket who stole for the 7th time, you have to bitch-slap someone for back talking to a noble, you have to discipline Gemmed that do something wrong, you have to discipline soldiers...All of that on top of the responsibilities of being a clan leader.  Adding yet another thing they're supposed to be enforcing, when the documentation doesn't say anything about this, because some players on a GDB thread felt that magickers should be more ostracized than it currently is...is adding yet another job to their hefty to-do list before they can pursue their own plot lines and interests.

[wizturbo]

If I play a psionist in the next few years all I will do with them is mind control NPCs to hate on mages.

You could...apply for staff....might be a lot easier :p

[RogueGunslinger]

The biggest problem for me is the disparity between skills. Mages in general have a very level grinding curve across their spells(not to mention attain them all in the same manner), where as mundanes seem to have some skills that go up quickly and others the take ages to grind. It doesn't seem to make much sense when a skill like Backstab or Parry can level up twice as fast as Kick or Listen.

[Is Friday]

If I play a psionist in the next few years all I will do with them is mind control NPCs to hate on mages.

You could...apply for staff....might be a lot easier :p

Nah I've got the karma to play one right now.

[Desertman]

I would love for there to be more emphasis placed on people who are "buddies" with gemmed mages being ostracized and possibly, if not CERTAINLY investigated and almost always harassed by the authorities for their relations.

I agree, but I don't think the "authorities" should be the ones doing it.  Peer pressure seems more realistic.  

Leaders lead by example.

That includes the leaders and rulers of society.

[CodeMaster]

But what exactly comes out of punishing the merchant who sold your gemmed a pair of boots, or the halfbreed whore that took their sid for a little fun.  Or the guy who had a conversation with them at the bar.  No laws were broken, no harm done, unless you're afraid of magick.   The commoners reaction to treat those mundanes with disdain seems perfectly logical.  "Why is so-and-so doing business with the 'gicker?  I'm not buying their boots anymore! "  etc...

I think we're on the same page here.  Your examples are fine (a conversation, a business transaction - no big deal).

Big deals to me would be things like renting an apartment with a magicker, engaging in an ongoing and serious romantic relationship with a magicker, wandering around in the wastes with a magicker, or even threatening one.

These things can and do happen in-game.

You could argue the noble role's "job" is to create the social framework in their city.  The Templarate uses magick itself.  They're sorcery-wielding minions of the most terrible sorcerer in the world, they're hardly the best people to act as the poster children for anti-magick in Allanak.

Good sentiment.  I'd agree it doesn't have to be a templar, but an authority of some kind setting positive examples (and doling out negative reinforcement when people act errantly) would be great.

The difference between nobles and templars though is that nobles have the privilege of dealing with the upper classes (aides and that sort), while it typically falls on templars to deal with the majority lower class (grebbers, elves).

For what it's worth, I didn't mean to suggest anywhere that the templarate should start openly disparaging the use of magic.

It also creates an enormous catch-22 for the Templarate on an OOC level, if they're the ones trying to enforce anti-magickal social sentiment.  They're the ones that employ the Gemmed in most cases, so they're acting as the leadership for the Gemmed "clan" so to speak...  they're also supposed to be the ones that shit in their employees cereal every morning?
[...]
How do you take on a leadership role like that?  Impossible to do and still have any fun for either the Gemmed or the Templar involved, unless some people are just in to masochistic roles like that.  

I'll disagree by way of example.  I had an elf who got treated like garbage in the Byn.  Dropped in the latrines multiple times, punished for small offenses, distrusted and laughed at.  The sergeants often led the charge, and I don't think they were facing any kind of "catch 22".

I also didn't mind it because I was playing an elf, and the documentation made it clear that he wouldn't be well loved.  If I got sick of it I could always retire him and roll up a human.

3)  Also, I don't know if you've ever played a Templar, but the role is filled with TONS of things you're supposed to enforce on a day to day.
[...]
Adding yet another thing they're supposed to be enforcing, when the documentation doesn't say anything about this, because some players on a GDB thread felt that magickers should be more ostracized than it currently is...is adding yet another job to their hefty to-do list before they can pursue their own plot lines and interests.

I would probably put interrogating pickpockets lower on the list than checking into the background of that dude who's trying to "get with" my gorgeous, well-endowed water mage, but that's just me.

No, I've never played a templar.  But part of being a successful templar is delegation, and this is something that you could easily bring other players to the table on.  So if it were me, I'd hire an inquisitor to spy on and check into these guys who are getting too buddy-buddy with the city's gemmed mages.  My inquisitor might determine nothing's amiss (joe grebber is too dumb to know any better)...

...but he might also discern that someone's trying to manipulate one of my valued assets.

[Fujikoma]

I agree, it would be nice if Templars kept a closer eye on those that work for them, instead of being reactionary when the actions of their employees and servants nets them a well-deserved reaction. Part of the key to that would be keeping a close eye on anyone that tries to manipulate their tools, and to really think about the motives behind it and potential consequences ahead of time.

[Patuk]

A lot of mages are played by offpeakers. When I log in during dinnertime for me there tend to be few people in general, but many gemmers around.

Having said that, I've had a single character who was willing and in fact did bang a magicker, and especially in retrospect, all I can think now is 'why the hell did things go well for so long?' When you're a walking master of doom having sex with some idiot who can't get a normal girl to like him, for even a minor mishap to happen seems likely.

A solution I'd like to see is for magick to actually become as dangerous as it's implied to be. Not to the extent that there would be no krathi played beyond the ten day mark, but, from the top of my head:

(Note: I'm doing my best not to describe any existant spells. It's not easy, so at least give me some credit and don't entirely remove my post)

A rukkian casting spells, and doubly so at a higher level, might cause an occasional minor tremor or natural deformity to happen. The armour of people near a rukkian weaving spells might degrade a bit because of their effect on matter.

A vivaduan may have fewer adverse effects on bystanders, what with their reputation being better than other mages, but their magics could cause bystanders' clothes to stain with weird fluids or inflict minor diseases/poisons and little miraculous healing acts in equal measure.

A krathi shouldn't really be near friendlies while casting at all. I have seen that the code supports people being set on fire, and their thirst levels could be increased as well.

Elkran spells could cause static currents to shock unfortunates, even temporarily lowering agility in the process.

Drovians casting shit may darken rooms, put out light sources or even curse bystanders with odd, fleeting magical nastiness.

... I got nothing insofar Nilazi are concerned, but people who hang with Nilazi know exactly what they are doing, I reckon.

If you want people to distrust elves and think of them all as thieves, make them good thieves. Since they are, people really fucking hate elves.

Consequentially, I really don't think magick is going to be treated in line with the documentation very well as long as it's more reliable than modern firearm and explosives.

[Armaddict]

I am not sure if Patuk's ideas would 'fix' things, but I do find them intriguing, fresh, and cool.

[Fujikoma]

... having banged some magickers, I can say this...

It is a bad idea, and it's backed up by code. People get a bit crazy over feelings, and mages are well known to have some scary coded powers. If you want to live, don't be that guy, don't bang the f-me magicker, it's going to bite you so hard you'll wish you'd tried to kiss a mekillot... and no one will feel sorry for you, because they all know you banged a gicker... in fact, they will laugh, as they urinate on your corpse.

[Riev]

... having banged some magickers, I can say this...

It is a bad idea, and it's backed up by code. People get a bit crazy over feelings, and mages are well known to have some scary coded powers. If you want to live, don't be that guy, don't bang the f-me magicker, it's going to bite you so hard you'll wish you'd tried to kiss a mekillot... and no one will feel sorry for you, because they all know you banged a gicker... in fact, they will laugh, as they urinate on your corpse.

Except sex and banging arent code and relationships are not "backed up by code". There is no non-staff intervention actvated code that kicks in for banging gicks.

[MeTekillot]

I think Fujikoma is making a "bitches be crazy" sort of statement.

[HavokBlue]

There's no "bitches be crazy" code

[Fujikoma]

There's no "bitches be crazy" code

Yes, but there is "blast you in the face with a fireball after a creepy stare and a profession of love, along with a confession to having killed everyone they suspected you of sleeping with" code.

[Patuk]

Generally speaking, not banging anyone is the way to go if you don't wanna die.