Armageddon General Discussion Board

Simple question: should the non-magick Extended Subguilds be tied to karma?

That's these subguilds right here,
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Extended%20Subguilds

I don't think they should be. In my ideal Armageddon, PCs are able to perform wide variety of tasks competently and able to excel at a few of them. The old Guild+Subguild combinations tend to fall short of this ideal. You could do whatever your Guild allows, to what caps it allows, but in most combinations subguilds add only a few abilities at (relatively or objectively) low levels. Extended subguilds, giving more skills at higher caps than normal subguilds, add more variety and roundness to PCs. For others, this complicates guild sniffing, introduces uncertainty and mystery in to another PC's capabilities, creating much more versatile allies and enemies. Some like the tactical rock-paper scissors of Guild balance, but I personally find it jarring and immersion breaking. I'd like to see the lines between Guilds blurred, being more of an emphasis than a license to dominate in a particular field.

The main argument for restricting Extended Subguilds to Karma has been balance. I see Balance as breaking down in to a few categories, each of which need separate addressing:

Balance between "Extended" and "Normal" mundane Subguilds
Currently, yes, a mundane PC with an extended subguild is more capable and versatile than one without. But if all PCs had Extended Subguilds, then there's no longer any balancing that's needed to be worried about on this front.

Balance between Guilds with Extended Subguilds vs other Guilds
It could be argued that a Guild with an Extended Subguild might become "Too good" at their job, or "Too versatile." While I think versatility is only a good thing, I'm skeptical of the "too good" claim. An assassin with Protector could potentially become a better assassin than one without. But they cannot truly usurp the warrior's place of straight-up few-tricks melee face smashing. The differences between the Guilds would become less extreme, but they would not totally vanish.

Magickers with Extended Subguilds
This was the one area of Balance that I definitely thought Extended Subguilds needed restricting: limiting the numbers of Magicker Guilds with Extended Subguilds. But with Magick now being subguild based, it's a moot point. It does, however, lead us to the next point of balance:

Extended Subguilds vs Magick Subguilds
Following the changes, a few of us expressed concerns that mundanes were losing their place in the world compared to magickers, that magick subguilds are just codedly "better." While I think the non-coded Social drawbacks of Magick are an important part of their balance, there's no denying that a Warrior with a Magick subguild will be able to cast more spells than a Warrior with a Mundane subguild, extended or otherwise. But will this actually make them better characters? Our hypotethical Warrior Magicker PC can cast, but he cannot (generally): ride with a weapon in both hands; climb; forage as efficiently as others; find his way through a storm; sneak and steal in the cities; poison; craft items and submit Mastercrafts that may go on to outlive both PCs; exist without being a social pariah. He can just beat stuff up and perhaps cast spells in support of that goal. He may be a better Warrior than non-magick Warriors... but he's still limited. Still specialized, just like all characters. Perhaps even more so.

Extended Mundane subguilds still have a lot of advantages over a Magick one. By making all Extended Subguilds available to all players, we ensure the continued predominance of Mundane PCs in the game world. Those who have not yet been given the karma to play a magicker can still feel like they're contributing by having the option to play better rounded characters, who can excel at as many or more tasks than what a Magicker can do, and contribute items to further enrich the gameworld.

I agree with everything you said.

I voted other.

I don't think they should be behind Karma, but then the sub-guild system would have to be completely redone again, walking all over the work they just put in.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 30, 2016, 06:27:28 PM
I voted other.

I don't think they should be behind Karma, but then the sub-guild system would have to be completely redone again, walking all over the work they just put in.

I'm with RGS here.

No. They're direct upgrades and improvements on standard subguilds, with a couple of exceptions.

There is no thematic difference between hunter and outdoorsman, nor is there a 'challenge' in maintaining their implied theme with one over the other. They exist in their current form as coded power-ups for players with karma and nothing else -- there is no reason to take thief over rogue, there is no reason to take bard over minstrel.

If you have karma, you play the game from a coded power level significantly above those who don't have an equal amount, without any of the drawbacks or challenges associated with traditionally karma gated roles, like muls, desert elves or magickers.

I'd have replaced the old subguilds with the new ones and used the available slots to create more elaborate and diverse options, rather than creating one more reason for players to resent each other, as well as the staff.

I think this is crazy power creep across the board with probably some weird unforeseen consequences, both for magick, and for ext subs.

We don't have enough main guilds. If they got split up more, and hell, if it was like Arm2's planned half guild system, I could get behind that a bunch.

I voted yes. Reasoning.. they are more powerful, yes..Wether karma is working as it should or not, it gives new players something to strive for. It tries to encourage more players to keep within the rules, as they do their best to impress and be better roleplayers so they can get the perks of a better subguild.

As a general rule: No.

If, however, there is an exception where the inclusion of guild X with subguild Y will create a character that is vastly superior to all other characters of guild X without subguild Y, then that specific subguild could be justified in having a karma level attached to it. I am doubtful that most of the extended subguilds will fall into that territory. I'm highly skeptical that any crafting extended subguild will fall into that territory. As such I do think there is value in removing the karma barrier from most, if not all, mundane extended subguilds (with the proviso being that any troublesome extended subguilds will be increased as the problems become apparent).

I'm a fan of karma gates.  Karma motivates players to behave and focus on role play.  It's one of the very few carrots that staff have to offer players, and I'd rather not have a staff that only carry sticks.

It also causes people to give up and leave.

Quote from: wizturbo on March 30, 2016, 07:13:59 PM
I'm a fan of karma gates.  Karma motivates players to behave and focus on role play.  It's one of the very few carrots that staff have to offer players, and I'd rather not have a staff that only carry sticks.

Quote from: Vwest on March 30, 2016, 07:21:18 PM
It also causes people to give up and leave.

The carrot analogy falls flat when the carrot is fundamentally based on subjectivity (what Staff, as individuals and collectively [which changes with the times] think is good play) and luck (happening to play at times and in roles that let you be seen by Staff), despite everyone's best efforts to standardize the sysem.

When it comes to Staff encouraging good play, I would rather have Staff applying the stick in a systemic, fair, impartial manner whose operation is clear to anyone but the most self-absorbed. Have clearly defined rules, have defined punishments, apply them equally without malice. Which I think they do. I also think most players roleplay because we enjoy roleplaying, not because we're after the carrot. So I'm skeptical that the idea of the karma gate, especially on Subguilds that have no justification for existence other than being codedly better than other Subguilds, is necessary here.

There's currently really only two reasons to pick a normal Subguild if you have the Karma for extended ones: you want the Ride skill really badly (only 2 Extended Subguilds have it), or you're playing a karma-restricted race and you don't have enough karma left over to buy an extended subguild.

tldr: Karma gates should exist on Guilds that give powerful bonuses and require fundamentally different, more "difficult" play when it comes to fitting in with the game world - magickers, psions, and certain races.

I wonder to what degree karma turns Arm into a skinner box. I've spoken to more than a few people who ended playing Arm because they just sorta figured there was nothing left to do after they'd played sorcerors and templars.

I tend to favor temporary benefits for karma over permanent power boosts. This gives a reward to people who are genuinely trying to add to the game world without nearly as much discouragement to new players who will have their characters comparatively gimped compared to even nearly identical versions made by players with karma.

With this in mind I'd prefer the current karma system to be flipped. Instead of giving everyone access to skill bumps, return them to being based on karma. Then revamp the existing subguilds to be equivalent in capabilities to the extended subguilds.

This will change the reward system to give karma-wielding players a temporary reusable benefit on newly created characters, allowing them to come into the game with semi-established characters skillwise. However, every character regardless of karma level will eventually be able to catch up given time and play.

Good points.

I voted other, because I'd like to see ESG's removed from character creation and instead added as additional progression to normal subclasses.  Or something like that.

i.e. My assassin/hunter -grows- into an assassin/outdoorsman by some metric or another.

Cuz that'd be neat.

Quote from: Case on March 30, 2016, 06:40:25 PM
I think this is crazy power creep across the board with probably some weird unforeseen consequences, both for magick, and for ext subs.

We don't have enough main guilds. If they got split up more, and hell, if it was like Arm2's planned half guild system, I could get behind that a bunch.

Power Creep compared to what? The power Extended Subguilds have over normal ones vanishes the moment the last Normal subguild dies or stores (unless you want Ride; see my point above).

Extended Subguilds combined with our current Guilds do allow for more able PCs, but what exactly is bad about this? I suspect it comes down to you and I having different opinions on where the limits of characters should be. Personally it sets my teeth on edge whenever I hear talk of "splitting up the Guilds"; I can only imagine something like an Offensive Warrior Guild (bash, kick, disarm, weapon skill) and a Defensive Warrior Guild (block, parry, rescue, maybe weapon skill), requiring you take Protector or Aggressor if you want a character anything like our current Warrior guild. Which incidentally means you still can't ride, sneak, climb, or craft in any capacity. Splitting the Guilds up just makes the resultant characters even more limited, which is the biggest failing of the Guild system.

Basically as soon as someone makes a thread saying "Should we split up the guilds?" I will post and say it is a terrible idea.

The only downside for Magicker subguilds I can see at current is that they don't get to be quite the Power Ranger they can be now. It may also make Guild sniffing them easier; the moment your minion can't perform a mundane skill outside of their presume moveset, they're quasi-outed as a magicker. Which, frankly, is not that different from the current state of affairs.

I say other: it depends on what they do with the main guilds, and what they do with karma, and what they do with the entire skill progression system.

Quote from: Patuk on March 30, 2016, 07:40:35 PM
I've spoken to more than a few people who ended playing Arm because they just sorta figured there was nothing left to do after they'd played sorcerors and templars.

I think that's a symptom of things remaining frozen in time, forever.

Change here is almost non-existent and when it does happen, it's often influenced so minutely by players as to render us irrelevant. Those precious few allowed to have even a sliver of real influence are essentially the 1% of the Armageddon 1%, so for most of us, even if we're here for a decade or two, we're never relevant, never have an impact and can never, ever leave a mark on the game world.

Karma is likely the only goal most players can ever realistically have here and I think it skews a lot of perceptions.

You can't look back and say, "I'm the one who broke the back of Salarr." or "I raised the army that laid waste to Red Storm." because these things are forever beyond our means, both because of staff prerogative* and because we've written the game into a corner where everything is decided by immortal, untouchable magickal super powers and there is absolutely no way for them to lose power - barring a staff generated deus ex machina.

But then we're back to staff prerogative.

I'm not being critical of the lack of change, here. I believe the lack of overarching change is more about keeping players content, as the risk in sweeping change is it will upset those who have become comfortable with the status quo and cause them to leave - in a genre where the pool of players is a slow dwindle, this kind of thing can be a game killer.

I'm pointing to the lack of change as the major reason we have such a heavy lean towards a 'play for karma' mindset and why some people tend to fade away once they've got what they're after. You've hit karma goal, you play your coveted options and... congratulations, you've won the game! Bye.

If you're playing the game exclusively to win karma, such as running sponsored roles in hopes of winning favor or playing characters who aren't doing or pursuing the things you, as a player, find interesting and enjoyable, then you're doing it wrong in my opinion. It's a losing proposition, but one that entirely too many people seem eager to accept.

That isn't the point of a hobby game. I'm not here for Progress Quest and you shouldn't be, either.

Unfortunately, the value of each point of karma has gone up sharply, as it now directly establishes who has the most coded power in the game. There is no sense of rock paper scissors, more karma = more coded power. Two karma makes your character better than every one karma character in the game in hard coded terms, three and beyond exaggerates this even more.

This coded power comes without challenge or drawback, they are the mushroom to your Mario.

Karma is now much, much, much more likely to become peoples singular focus than it was before because without it?

You're meat for the people who have it, chummer.

I don't like this idea if simply for the fact that I liked what was done to revamp the old subguilds.  Should every character get a master subguild?  I don't think so, honestly.  And I know I've been repeating it a lot, lately, but I hope karma becomes a regenerating resource, so you can't just play Extended or Magick subguilds every single character.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 30, 2016, 08:06:28 PM

Quote from: Case on March 30, 2016, 06:40:25 PM
I think this is crazy power creep across the board with probably some weird unforeseen consequences, both for magick, and for ext subs.

We don't have enough main guilds. If they got split up more, and hell, if it was like Arm2's planned half guild system, I could get behind that a bunch.

Power Creep compared to what? The power Extended Subguilds have over normal ones vanishes the moment the last Normal subguild dies or stores (unless you want Ride; see my point above).

Extended Subguilds combined with our current Guilds do allow for more able PCs, but what exactly is bad about this? I suspect it comes down to you and I having different opinions on where the limits of characters should be. Personally it sets my teeth on edge whenever I hear talk of "splitting up the Guilds"; I can only imagine something like an Offensive Warrior Guild (bash, kick, disarm, weapon skill) and a Defensive Warrior Guild (block, parry, rescue, maybe weapon skill), requiring you take Protector or Aggressor if you want a character anything like our current Warrior guild. Which incidentally means you still can't ride, sneak, climb, or craft in any capacity. Splitting the Guilds up just makes the resultant characters even more limited, which is the biggest failing of the Guild system.

Basically as soon as someone makes a thread saying "Should we split up the guilds?" I will post and say it is a terrible idea.

The only downside for Magicker subguilds I can see at current is that they don't get to be quite the Power Ranger they can be now. It may also make Guild sniffing them easier; the moment your minion can't perform a mundane skill outside of their presume moveset, they're quasi-outed as a magicker. Which, frankly, is not that different from the current state of affairs.

That's not what I had in mind for 'splitting up the guilds' but hopefully I'll remember to post when I'm not working. Remind me later BS?

As for the Ext Subs, I thought they were quite good at 3 per year. The power creep I mean though, is having more of the physical main guilds represented in population, of which three are vastly more popular than others, then allowing for magicks atop them. While it drags down the magick level, it'll probably drag up the fighty fight level. Affects hunting a bunch, and it's not like there's some major repeatable enemy right now and stuff. We'll see.

It's still pretty easy to hide your subguilds if you're clever.

Briefly, what I'd kinda like to see is picking two half mains, and one sub, and that forms your character. A pure warrior is 2x warrior + one sub. A magicker warrior is half warrior + half gicker + one sub. I don't mean cap at half, but cap lesser and differently if you're not a pure form of the main class. That also allows for like, a burglar + warrior kinda dude or other combinations.

I'd also like to see more abilities which are trait based or non skilled, such as when only rangers had direction sense, or forage food, or linguists/bards getting faster acquisition. More of those odd little specialities that can add some flavor. Hell, maybe make one or two choosable depending on the guild, kinda like D&D feats.

That or I'd be interested in some basic talent packages like "ranger" or "warrior", then you pick some additional skills too. Or freeform if skills were divided into categories.

Not sure where else to post something like this, but that's a rough outline of what I'm thinking BS.

Quote from: SuchDragonWow on March 30, 2016, 09:13:48 PM
I don't like this idea if simply for the fact that I liked what was done to revamp the old subguilds.  Should every character get a master subguild?  I don't think so, honestly.  And I know I've been repeating it a lot, lately, but I hope karma becomes a regenerating resource, so you can't just play Extended or Magick subguilds every single character.

I would just wait for mine to regenerate between characters, assuming I didn't have re-earn it (which sounds like a logistical nightmare and would just slow down the accumulation rate even more). Much as I did with Spec apps.

Quote from: Vwest on March 30, 2016, 09:07:52 PM
Unfortunately, the value of each point of karma has gone up sharply, as it now directly establishes who has the most coded power in the game. There is no sense of rock paper scissors, more karma = more coded power. Two karma makes your character better than every one karma character in the game in hard coded terms, three and beyond exaggerates this even more.

This coded power comes without challenge or drawback, they are the mushroom to your Mario.

Karma is now much, much, much more likely to become peoples singular focus than it was before because without it?

You're meat for the people who have it, chummer.

As someone who killed, by my rough count, approximately 31 points worth of karma on a human warrior/thug over 2 RL years (thanks Crimcode), I wouldn't say things are quite this bleak. Your argument is truer the more you restrict it to Extended Subguilds, however. They're just flat-out Better, existing for no reason but to reward players.

I went with Other, because I don't think we should put all the mundane extended subguilds in the same basket.

As I wrote in another thread, if as a brand new player with no karma I am encouraged to play a merchant who can mastercraft all kinds of stuff including a sword,  why am I then not trusted to play a ranger who can also mastercraft a sword?

The difference is that the master crafting ranger can both make and use the sword. The ranger in some ways, now has a (slightly IMO) greater ability to shape and impact the game world than a mundane merchant with a normal subguild or a mundane ranger.  However, I don't think the difference in ability is great enough to warrant karma. Other extended subguilds might give greater advantages and each should be evaluated individually.

Another way to look at it is in terms of experience and understanding of the game.  With greater diversity and ability to impact the game world, one would hope that there would be at least a basic understanding about how the game works, and the ability to keep a player alive for a decent amount of time. This implies at least one karma point for longevity.

And all this assumes that karma is about trust.  If it is also about perks for playing well or something, then Extended subguilds make nice perks!

The fact that they were special apps also was probably a reason to put them behind a karma barrier. Limit to some extent the requests staff had to deal with.  

Quote from: Armaddict on March 30, 2016, 08:00:23 PM
Good points.

I voted other, because I'd like to see ESG's removed from character creation and instead added as additional progression to normal subclasses.  Or something like that.

i.e. My assassin/hunter -grows- into an assassin/outdoorsman by some metric or another.

Cuz that'd be neat.

I voted other - something like above. Use longevity as the metric. Character lasts a month (or 3 months or whatever is considered long for karma purposes) then regular subguild turns to extended.
Character doubles that time, all existing skills they have go to master cap.

My oppinion: This thread has a bunch of text walls.

Quote from: Jingo on March 31, 2016, 05:45:33 PM
My oppinion: This thread has a bunch of text walls.

tl;dr of the "No" camp: karma-locked mundane extended subguilds are codified staff favoritism that provide no benefit to the game at large by being karma-locked. There has been no argument for why they should remain locked other than "power creep" and "Staff have already done a lot with the subugilds, let's not make them redo it again."

I find the power creep argument more compelling, if not convincing.

Quote from: Vwest on March 30, 2016, 07:21:18 PM
It also causes people to give up and leave.

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.


Anyway, I think we should give the staff time to roll out the new guilds before we comment on what karma should or should not gate.  For all we know, there's guilds that aren't allowed to be paired with extended subguilds (making normal subguilds critical for those) or they have karma gates as well that make the extended subguild karma reqs feel less disjointed.

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 06:05:34 PM

Quote from: Vwest on March 30, 2016, 07:21:18 PM
It also causes people to give up and leave.

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.  

The correct answer is yes to both.

Edit: The real question is which do karma-locked extended subguilds do more of: retain players or drive them away?

I don't see the issue here. I don't think one karma is terribly hard to acquire for even the noobiest nub.

Most Extended are (currently) 2 or 3 as I recall. They can be acquired through special apps, sure. But why do we need to prove ourselves (and start over on a new character) so that we can submit a mastercraft for a clay bong?

All extended subguilds are at the 1 to 2 karma level range, at the moment.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 31, 2016, 05:59:09 PM

Quote from: Jingo on March 31, 2016, 05:45:33 PM
My oppinion: This thread has a bunch of text walls.

tl;dr of the "No" camp: karma-locked mundane extended subguilds are codified staff favoritism that provide no benefit to the game at large by being karma-locked. There has been no argument for why they should remain locked other than "power creep" and "Staff have already done a lot with the subugilds, let's not make them redo it again."

I find the power creep argument more compelling, if not convincing.

The power creep argument is not compelling, because people with karma can play these characters all they want. Even if we move to a regenerating CGP model, I average 3 or fewer characters a year and would have no problem slapping an ext. subguild on every character. Characters with extended subguilds are running around all over the place. All karma does with respect to ext. subguilds is guarantee that new players are not on an even playing field. If you want to restrict the presence of extended subguilds, karma is not a good mechanism for doing so. The restriction should apply to everyone.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 31, 2016, 06:38:50 PM
Most Extended are (currently) 2 or 3 as I recall. They can be acquired through special apps, sure. But why do we need to prove ourselves (and start over on a new character) so that we can submit a mastercraft for a clay bong?

They were dropped recently actually. Now it ranges between 1 and 2 karma.

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 06:05:34 PM
It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 06:57:20 PM

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 06:05:34 PM
It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

You know this just seems like such a wrong reason to choose to quit playing. Why? Because you're assuming that "almost every other character in the game" will be superior to yours. Here's some actual facts:

Most full-guild mages die very early, to very stupid things, often involving their own poor choices. I don't see anything new happening on this front with the shift from main to sub.

If you are able to have a 100-day character, you will be "strictly and indefinitely [sic]" superior to most any guild with a mage subguild. On the other hand - what good is being codedly superior to other characters if you and they never interact with each other in combat? I mean if you're playing someone who you _intend_ to piss everyone off with, such that they put a hunt out on you, then yeah - being superior is gonna mean something. But you can only play those types so many times before you get tired of playing the target. And if you play the PKer every time, the staff might have something to say about that too.

Your fun, based on *your* criteria, will only change if you rely on the code to define your character AND if you rely on maxing your skills to define your sense of fun.

It sounds like you might have more fun in a more traditional H&S where guilds all are "balanced" and he who grinds the best wins.

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 06:57:20 PM

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 06:05:34 PM
It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

I agree and I disagree.

I agree because yeah, it sucks knowing you've been dealt the short straw. Especially so for a long lived character. And in particular knowing that some of players of this game revel in putting you at the other end of their power fantasy.

I also disagree that power comes from karma roles. I actually think leader pc's have significantly more power. And these pc's are typically mundane and rely on in game social structures more than code. They are more often than not untouchable by anything but mundane power too.

It's in this framework I have to wonder what the point of magick is at all in the game.

Quote from: Jingo on March 31, 2016, 07:09:53 PM

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 06:57:20 PM

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 06:05:34 PM
It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

I agree and I disagree.

I agree because yeah, it sucks knowing you've been dealt the short straw. Especially so for a long lived character. And in particular knowing that some of players of this game revel in putting you at the other end of their power fantasy.

I also disagree that power comes from karma roles. I actually think leader pc's have significantly more power. And these pc's are typically mundane and rely on in game social structures more than code. They are more often than not untouchable by anything but mundane power too.

It's in this framework I have to wonder what the point of magick is at all in the game.

For me the point is the same as it always was: a fun roleplay option. Nothing more or less. I enjoy(ed) it for the "neato" factor. Same reason I wanted to play a Lirathan templar (didn't get that role), a GMH merchant family member (got that), a bastard noble (got that), and a few other "neato" types of roles that aren't the typical warrior/thug Bynner or merchant/scavenger Kadian crafter.

I feel the people who put such value on these choices as "power" choices are missing the mark entirely. Yes, these options have certain coded advantages. But the player has to actually USE those advantages for them to BE advantages, and most characters don't live long enough to get that chance. The ones who do are few and far between and don't fit the criteria of VWest's complaint of being inferior to anyone who isn't mundane.

That wasn't Vwest's complaint, though, as far as I understand it. I think she was complaining about being inferior to anyone with a mundane extended subguild.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 31, 2016, 07:07:13 PMIt sounds like you might have more fun in a more traditional H&S where guilds all are "balanced" and he who grinds the best wins.

I'm not less of a role-player for having a mind for code or for having some enjoyment in that aspect of the game. This is a MUD, not a MUSH.

Try to keep up.

Quote from: Beethoven on March 31, 2016, 07:27:10 PM
That wasn't Vwest's complaint, though, as far as I understand it. I think she was complaining about being inferior to anyone with a mundane extended subguild.

The point stands. The only way ANY guild or subguild will be superior to ANY other guild or subguild, is if the player uses it, against the other player. PK just isn't that common in Armageddon. It happens, but it's not all that common. The mentality that "I have to be codedly superior to other people in order for my character to be viable or fun" is a "wrong" mentality to have in Armageddon. You don't need to be codedly superior. This is just fact. UNLESS your idea of fun is being codedly superior. If that is the definition of your idea of fun in gaming, then RPIs are not a good match.

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 07:44:34 PM

Quote from: Lizzie on March 31, 2016, 07:07:13 PMIt sounds like you might have more fun in a more traditional H&S where guilds all are "balanced" and he who grinds the best wins.

I'm not less of a role-player for having a mind for code or for having some enjoyment in that aspect of the game. This is a MUD, not a MUSH.

This isn't the problem.  The problem is your assumption that the majority of other players play the game the same way as you do.  Quite of a few of us give no shits about coded power.  So your statements (emphasis mine)

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 06:57:20 PM
The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

are hyperbolic.

I've played a hairdresser for fuck sake.  My longest character ever had 50 days played or something and was a merchant/tailor (because I couldn't be bothered to branch clothworking).  Not everyone here is out there investing 100-150 days into amassing coded.  Not even the vast majority of people seem to be.  I'd say you're probably the exception if you're caring about amassing so much coded power, not the rule.  Such grand statements based on assumptions you have no basis of proof for ring hollow.

I don't think so. If they started with higher skills, maybe, but as it is now all it does is give more things for you to possibly be good at if you invest time. That's like advanced weapon skills being karma locked.

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 06:57:20 PM

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

That's your view point.  There might be 2 other players who we keep around because of the way things are.  And I'm not talking about their direction perception of the system, but rather the positive effects it has on the game at large.  

I know when I was a newbie, the karma system was something that attracted me to the game and encouraged me to try harder.  It also does a fantastic job of filtering out players that might not be a good fit for Armageddon, powergamers, twinks, and the like.  The most powerful options are gained through roleplay, not through writing some l33t combat training script.  So it A)  Promotes good behavior B) Discourages players who aren't a good fit for this game...  Seems like a win to me.  

If anything, the Karma system reinforces a core tenet of Armageddon.  Life is hard, and things are unfair.  Your character will not be fairly treated.  It will have stats that are randomized, and might be weaker than others.  Even if the stats are better, and the guild/subguild option is the bestest available, they can easily be be "mistreated" by someone who was born into a role that puts them above that character forever.  For no reason other than they have the last name Borsail.  That's Armageddon.  It isn't a warm and welcoming place of fairness, and we don't want to attract players who are looking for that in a game.

If you want to play a character that is not "strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game" then put in your time and follow the guidelines and earn the 1 or 2 karma required to unlock these extended subguilds.  If that doesn't appeal to you, because you need to be as strong or stronger than everyone else from the get go, then maybe the system is working as intended.  These systems have been around for decades, and Armageddon's roleplay standards are leaps and bounds above everything else as a result...  It seems to work.

But anyway, with all that said...  Why not just special app if it bothers you?  Anyone can spec app any of the extended subguilds, so give that go, and maybe you'll earn the karma you need to not have to jump through that hoop by the time you've played through those characters.

Interesting fact; my mother thinks I'm the most handsome player here. So suck on that, guys. But seriously, if your average character lasts 100-150 days, then you couldn't possibly use up all 3 of your spec apps in a year. (Unless you suicide for stats.) So, you're not really at a disadvantage.

I voted "yes" to this, but I probably really mean "other." Honestly, I still kind of wish extended subs were capped at 3 or 4 a year. Not via special app, but maybe some automated system of counting. Gated at only 2 karma, they're not really "extended" but rather the new norm for 80-90% of the active player base. And if that's the case, why have regular subguilds at all? They're more like a punishment for the new or consistently shitty. (I have more empathy for the former than the latter.) The way things are right now, I would agree with Vwest's assessment that these are just power ups for karma players, but....


... that could always change based on what's happening to main guilds. (Pls imms, just fix pickpockets and leave Brittney alone!)

I also voted other since we don't know what's coming down the pipe with the rest of the guild revamp.  In general though, I like that there remains carrots as opposed to just sticks.  I also am in agreement with Lizzie, in that coded power is not for a lot of players necessarily predictive of the enjoyment of playing Armageddon.

Another thought on the topic:

Characters with only subguilds as opposed to extended subguilds are somewhat less capable in terms of the range of things they can do and excel at than those that have them.  This might lead to some of these characters being encouraged (or forced, depending on your view) to interact more with other characters who can do these things that they need or want to do or have done.  This I assume, is one of the main arguments for the guild system in the first place.  For newer players, this sort of player engagement would hopefully help to promote good RP and learning of the social structures and other aspects of the game world.  Perhaps more importantly, it might even help to hook Ginka's claws in their pool souls, if someone gives them a great scene out of one of those interactions.

Has the introduction of extended subguilds lessened player engagement overall?  My guess is that it may have to a small extent, but I'm sure there's no way for any us to really know, nor would there be any way to quantitatively measure such a thing.

Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on March 31, 2016, 09:53:06 PM

... that could always change based on what's happening to main guilds. (Pls imms, just fix pickpockets and leave Brittney alone!)

Yeah my money is on some guilds not mixing with extended subguild options.

I probably should have said that I expect Guilds, Subguilds, and Karma to continue to undergo review, and I conceptualized the question more along the lines of "If you had to make a decision today, would you keep Extended Subguilds karma locked?"

Because I would not at all be surprised if there's continued movement on the subguild front.

While it's true that there are many aspects in the game that does not involve skills, or code in any way, saying that a player should not take skills and code into a 'major' account is I think an incorrect way to approach this.

One doesnt have to engage in PvP to think that someone with extended subguilds is superior to them.

Consider two recruits joining Kurac. Both are warriors. One of the warriors is warrior/hunter. The other is a warrior/outdoorsman. Setting aside how interesting those characters are. How adept, how engaging, how fun, and how versed are they in use of common sense. Assuming that both are equal in all these aspects. Which of the two would be more valuable To a Kuraci Sargeant? I would say someone who demonstrated all these extra skills and talents and affinities.

Yes. It's true. Skills and coded prowess is not the only thing one judges about a character. But skills and coded prowess is still ONE of the things one judges about a character. To say that these concepts are irrelevant. To say that taking them into account means a player is too keen on Hack&Slash is, in my opinion, misguided.

Quote from: Dar on March 31, 2016, 10:12:48 PM
While it's true that there are many aspects in the game that does not involve skills, or code in any way, saying that a player should not take skills and code into a 'major' account is I think an incorrect way to approach this.

One doesnt have to engage in PvP to think that someone with extended subguilds is superior to them.

Consider two recruits joining Kurac. Both are warriors. One of the warriors is warrior/hunter. The other is a warrior/outdoorsman. Setting aside how interesting those characters are. How adept, how engaging, how fun, and how versed are they in use of common sense. Assuming that both are equal in all these aspects. Which of the two would be more valuable To a Kuraci Sargeant? I would say someone who demonstrated all these extra skills and talents and affinities.

Yes. It's true. Skills and coded prowess is not the only thing one judges about a character. But skills and coded prowess is still ONE of the things one judges about a character. To say that these concepts are irrelevant. To say that taking them into account means a player is too keen on Hack&Slash is, in my opinion, misguided.

I'd actually take the Warrior/Hunter over the Warrior/Outdoorsman, since I'm not going to be picking the former's ass up off the sand every 3 rooms while riding.

That supports my point in equal measure.

More riding Extended Subguilds!


You could probably make a Raider ExSub pulling skills from Bounty Hunter and Outlaw.

I'm guessing the Kuraci Sergeant you use in your example could care less about whether one character is a warrior/hunter or a warrior/outdoorsman.   What's much more important on an IC level for them is the person's personality,, their ability to follow orders, their ability to encourage others, whether they are trustworthy...  You know...the stuff that actually matters?    OOCly speaking, they're wondering about how active you are, how fun your character is to play around, and whether or not you're playing during their usual play times.  I think what subguild this person has probably comes in pretty much last in order of priority.

I will however attest to BadSkeelz comment about the riding skill.  I fucking hate how disruptive bringing a new character along on anything out in the wilderness because they're unable to ride without falling behind every five seconds.  It makes me (and my characters ICly) not want to bring them anywhere.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on March 31, 2016, 10:18:17 PM
More riding Extended Subguilds!

You could probably make a Raider ExSub pulling skills from Bounty Hunter and Outlaw.

+1

If hunt, skinning, ride, direction sense, and climb, were high capped on a subguild I'd probably never play a ranger again. It's like having high parry, shield-use, a weapon-skill, bash, and kick on a subguild...

Actually I WOULD play ranger if that one was around too.... Now I really want them both.

As a 0-karma player, I think it's really unreasonable and unnecessary that my mundane characters must be worse than other people's mundane characters of the same race and such. I'm fully in the boat where advanced races and magick guilds need to be karma-restricted, but mundane guilds ought to be available to everyone. The prospect of waiting perhaps two years before I can make, say, a ranger who can get parry and shield use to master or a warrior who can scan and stealth (without spending one of my three annual special applications, anyway), is so crushingly demotivating that I'm not actually really planning to make another character after this one. That's not meant as some kind of quitting threat, that's simply how I feel after having spent 30 days playing a character with one of the basic subguilds and come to realize just how much worse my character is than it would be with a 2-karma subguild. I will not put in that kind of time and effort a second time if that character cannot become as good as some other guy's character just because he had access to some superior subguild.

The extended mundane subguilds present neither the difficulty nor the power to justify requiring karma, especially not in a game where getting one karma per year is generally the norm. It's just a way to reward experienced players with superior characters for the sake of privilege. They aren't new roles, they aren't perilously powerful, they're just objectively better and kept out of reach of new players for no reason. Regulating the potential of people's characters using such an arbitrary method is entirely against the spirit of an RPI game. A new player should not be saddled with unfair disadvantages that they can't overcome. It's like one of those "free to play" games where you can play for free, but you're relegated to these distinctly worse options while the premium mode players can surpass you in ways that you have no chance of compensating for. There's no justification for restricting superior mundane subguilds behind karma. It goes against what karma is for. It makes the new player experience worse and makes me disinclined to put time and effort into another inferior character.

The help file states that the purpose of karma is to "open up the more complicated, powerful and RP challenging roles to players," and that "karma is not an end in itself. Acquiring karma points is not something you should be 'striving towards' as a player." This is entirely at odds with the extended subguilds.

Quote from: Warsong on April 01, 2016, 03:19:19 AM
The extended mundane subguilds present neither the difficulty nor the power to justify requiring karma, especially not in a game where getting one karma per year is generally the norm.

They absolutely seem like they present the power to justify a karma gate.  If it were no big deal, no one would be talking about this.  Playing a Warrior who can hide, sneak and use poisons is powerful.  A ranger who can be a master at using a shield is powerful.  There's karma gates on these things because they're powerful.  Anyone who says otherwise is either lying, or delusional.

I do not want to see the power creep that would come from making extended subguilds open to everyone.  Personally, I hate that they're freely available with Karma, I'd love it if they were restricted to a certain number per year, or some kind of point system to regulate their usage either on a time basis, or on an options basis.

I really don't think they're that powerful.

I mean, you get advanced weapons, backstab, master parry, and hide that's not even capped at master. So what? Why is that the same karma level as being able to call forth an aspect of an Element to make yourself supernaturally tough/strong/fast?

EDIT: Oh, you get hide at master. It's backstab that's not even at master.

You still get dunked if some guy backstabs YOU with a poisoned weapon.

Quote from: wizturbo on April 01, 2016, 04:24:25 AM
I'd love it if they were restricted to a certain number per year, or some kind of point system to regulate their usage either on a time basis, or on an options basis.

Quote from: The Silence of the Erdlus on April 01, 2016, 04:42:24 AM

Quote from: wizturbo on April 01, 2016, 04:24:25 AM
I'd love it if they were restricted to a certain number per year, or some kind of point system to regulate their usage either on a time basis, or on an options basis.

As it was before?

Quote from: wizturbo on April 01, 2016, 04:24:25 AM

Quote from: Warsong on April 01, 2016, 03:19:19 AM
The extended mundane subguilds present neither the difficulty nor the power to justify requiring karma, especially not in a game where getting one karma per year is generally the norm.

They absolutely seem like they present the power to justify a karma gate.  If it were no big deal, no one would be talking about this.  Playing a Warrior who can hide, sneak and use poisons is powerful.  A ranger who can be a master at using a shield is powerful.  There's karma gates on these things because they're powerful.  Anyone who says otherwise is either lying, or delusional.

I do not want to see the power creep that would come from making extended subguilds open to everyone.  Personally, I hate that they're freely available with Karma, I'd love it if they were restricted to a certain number per year, or some kind of point system to regulate their usage either on a time basis, or on an options basis.

They're only really powerful in comparison to normal subguilds, which generally restrict a Guild to doing one thing well (if that) and a few things passably. If everyone had an extended subguild, such PCs would stop being this exceptional multifaceted tool - all would become characters with wide arrays (or specialized) skillsets. Rather more like actual people.

Going to short hand this as I'm watching a show about ring-tailed lemurs.

Quote from: Lizzie on March 31, 2016, 07:57:10 PM
1) The point stands. 2) The only way ANY guild or subguild will be superior to ANY other guild or subguild, is if the player uses it, against the other player. PK just isn't that common in Armageddon. It happens, but it's not all that common. 3) The mentality that "I have to be codedly superior to other people in order for my character to be viable or fun" is a "wrong" mentality to have in Armageddon. 3) You don't need to be codedly superior. 3) This is just fact. UNLESS your idea of fun is being codedly superior. If that is the definition of your idea of fun in gaming, then RPIs are not a good match.

1) No, it doesn't.
2) There are countless PvE scenarios where one guild will prove superior to all the others and in every single one of those scenarios, having an extended subguild will give you more favorable odds of success and survival than it's standard counterpart. This isn't strictly an issue of coded power for the purposes of 'PvP', but about coded power and associated advantages in general.
3) No one said they require 'codedly superior' characters in the thread. Am I wrong? I must be because you said it three times. Show me some quotes.

Quote from: valeria on March 31, 2016, 08:14:12 PM
Fails at reading comprehension; goes ballistic and throws insults, insinuations, etc

1) Grats on your hairdresser, but I don't see how it's relevant.
2) Thanks for the aggressive assumptions, insinuations and thinly veiled insults. A+ attitude for a helper and high karma player.

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 09:26:21 PM
That's your view point.
/snip
If you want to play a character that is not "strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game" then put in your time and follow the guidelines and earn the 1 or 2 karma required to unlock these extended subguilds. 

1) Exactly that, its only my point of view. It apparently sets people off like fundamentalists on a contrary opinion, too.
2) Could you elaborate on the bold part, for me?

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 01, 2016, 05:12:26 AM
They're only really powerful in comparison to normal subguilds, which generally restrict a Guild to doing one thing well (if that) and a few things passably. If everyone had an extended subguild, such PCs would stop being this exceptional multifaceted tool - all would become characters with wide arrays (or specialized) skillsets. Rather more like actual people.

And just like that, we'd have our level baseline playing field back and I could go back not not caring about karma.

Lemurs are pretty neat.

Can you explain yourself a little bit, Vwest? Are you saying you don't like how ext-subs offers more power to vets? That entire argument seems moot because newbies can play every one of the extended sub-guilds. All they have to do is spec-app.

I also find the idea silly because the only situation it is applicable is the very, very rare occurrence where you and another person happen to have the exact same main guild, similar skill levels, and are in each-others sphere's of roleplay enough that they become competition(PvE or PvP doesn't matter). And then you have a wealth of options to deal with that person through roleplay.

Veterans will always have an advantage. Fact of the matter is there's SO much more to being good at this game than having a good skill-set. Even if noobs had unfettered access to ext-subs, they would still get plowed over by someone with meta knowledge, both for that job promotion and in pvp.

For what it's worth, the most dangerous PCs I've ever known have been mundane non-extended subguild PCs. Either their Guild provided all the danger they needed, or they'd acquired political power (making skills meaningless), or both.

Quote from: Vwest on April 01, 2016, 05:47:56 AM

Quote from: valeria on March 31, 2016, 08:14:12 PM
Fails at reading comprehension; goes ballistic and throws insults, insinuations, etc

1) Grats on your hairdresser, but I don't see how it's relevant.
2) Thanks for the aggressive assumptions, insinuations and thinly veiled insults. A+ attitude for a helper and high karma player.

I'm pretty sure you're not reading me right.  Maybe you should try reading my post in a helpful, slightly frustrated voice instead of an aggressive one.  I don't actually care enough about this issue to get aggressive with you, and at that point I was still pretty set on trying to reason with you.  Meanwhile, my hairdresser example is relevant because your assumption is that everyone in the game is out there picking the highest powered guild/subguild combos they can and using their skills regularly, so that you'll be outskilled by everyone in the game.  The hairdresser illustrates that not all of us are here to min/max our skills, so no, you wouldn't be behind every player in the game.

Anyway, I'm done trying to reason with you at this point.  Good luck with your characters, and if taking a break/leaving the game is what you feel like you have to do, good luck with that too.  Despite disagreeing with you pretty strongly, I have zero personal animosity toward you.

I don't see the need for karma restrictions on certain extended subguilds, but I can see why it might be handy for some of the combat-oriented ones.

Every now and again some new player or general idiot likes to roll up a dorf warrior and slaughter everything in the rinth, for example. I'm glad he can't also do that with backstab as a default option. Sure he can do that as a dorf assassin, but assassins are way easier to kill out the gate than warriors are. Assassins tend to die to NPCs a lot. The problem sorts itself out. I can't say 100% that it would be worse if they were all warrior/slipknife, but based on my experience with those guilds it might be.

Karma isn't a perfect filter, but I feel like having a karma restriction on certain skill combos does prevent a certain degree of abuse. Maybe not abuse that has happened often, but I played a rinth leadership PC for over two years and experienced the above scenario more than once.

And if that zero-karma player still wants to play a dorf warrior/slipknife in the rinth, he can! He just has to special app for it. And then maybe he'll treat the character with a bit more care.

And yes, staff could just choose to punish those individual accounts if they engaged in that behaviour multiple times, but honestly I'm way more in favour of systems that make it so staff have to police things less on an individual account level. It's part of their job, sure, but I feel like there's way better things I'd rather my game staff did with their time.

MUDs cater to a few different playstyles, and there's even research to suggest this is true.  A certain portion of the playerbase cares more about X, and some do Y, and there's going to be a Z here and there, and so forth.  I don't think it's necessary, or even a show of good communication, to say that you don't think Y has problems because X is working for you.

To play with it a little, it's like saying "I don't think there's enough good mudsex going on, right now."  The response:  "I"ve been having a lot of fun crafting bone swords.  You could craft bone swords?"

Quote from: Vwest on April 01, 2016, 05:47:56 AM

Quote from: wizturbo on March 31, 2016, 09:26:21 PM
That's your view point.
/snip
If you want to play a character that is not "strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game" then put in your time and follow the guidelines and earn the 1 or 2 karma required to unlock these extended subguilds. 

1) Exactly that, its only my point of view. It apparently sets people off like fundamentalists on a contrary opinion, too.
2) Could you elaborate on the bold part, for me?

Seems pretty self explanatory to me.  You can put in a Karma review every 6 months.  Pass muster, get Karma, and you'll have these options unlocked without having to jump through a special application hoop.

I'd also like to point out that jumping through the special application hoop (and making a cool, compelling character that doesn't abuse the extra power of these abilities) is likely going to accelerate your karma gains, because you've just proven you can handle it.  Best way to get karma is to special app into karma roles and show you can handle it. 

I'm still rather frightened personally of [IC info].

Right, I forgot specific magick spells are common knowledge now, great.

Quote from: wizturbo on April 02, 2016, 03:10:11 AM
I'd also like to point out that jumping through the special application hoop (and making a cool, compelling character that doesn't abuse the extra power of these abilities) is likely going to accelerate your karma gains, because you've just proven you can handle it.  Best way to get karma is to special app into karma roles and show you can handle it. 

Unless you're me, then it doesn't matter if you play your roles awesome, Karma only comes from being nice on the GDB.

/snark

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 01, 2016, 10:43:07 PM
That entire argument seems moot because newbies can play every one of the extended sub-guilds. All they have to do is spec-app.

My experience with the spec-app process is that it isn't worth the time or extreme frustration.

I'm sure peoples mileage varies, though.

Quote from: valeria on April 01, 2016, 11:16:51 PM
I'm pretty sure you're not reading me right.

I'm pretty sure I read you spot on.

That was a very nice, face-saving post, though.

I put in a spec app and it took straight up three hours for it to be resolved.
It was for an extended subguild but I digress.

Extreme frustration? Extended-subguild spec-app? Are we talking about the same process? Every time I did it it was almost as easy(and as fast) as regular character generation.

That isn't mootness. That's an artificial, completely unnecessary barrier. If you're going to say new players should and do have easy access to extended subguilds anyway, surely there's no reason to have a separate application process.

Extra: Veteran player has no problem getting special apped characters; can't fathom how it wouldn't be the exact same for a new player. Doesn't see his own idiocy.

Listen, a new player isn't even gonna know to spec app stuff, let alone get it approved. Let's not pretend that there's no hurdle in that regard. The spec app process is for players who have proven that they deserve to try something. Are you seriously trying to suggest that there can't be any problem with gating mundane subguilds behind karma because everyone can just always spec app? Really? Am I hearing that?

Let's see.

First of all, new players can't just do that.

Secondly, you only get a few per year.

Thirdly, some players, after confrontations with Nyr, have been told never to spec app for anything or expect karma ever again.

The last one could change in his absence, but it's still very much a part of the game and a factor in spec app politics. To suggest that everyone can just automatically always spec app is nothing short of moronic.

Quote from: Coat of Arms on April 06, 2016, 10:18:48 AM
Extra: Veteran player has no problem getting special apped characters; can't fathom how it wouldn't be the exact same for a new player. Doesn't see his own idiocy.

Listen, a new player isn't even gonna know to spec app stuff, let alone get it approved. Let's not pretend that there's no hurdle in that regard. The spec app process is for players who have proven that they deserve to try something. Are you seriously trying to suggest that there can't be any problem with gating mundane subguilds behind karma because everyone can just always spec app? Really? Am I hearing that?

Let's see.

First of all, new players can't just do that.

Secondly, you only get a few per year.

Thirdly, some players, after confrontations with Nyr, have been told never to spec app for anything or expect karma ever again.

The last one could change in his absence, but it's still very much a part of the game and a factor in spec app politics. To suggest that everyone can just automatically always spec app is nothing short of moronic.

Is this post satire? If so you totally nailed it. Is Jihelu even a vet? I can actually tell you've never tried to spec-app for an extended-sub-guild if you think I got favoritism because it went through quickly... The idea I receive favoritism at all is kind of amusing to me. You think that just because I have a high post count and have played for years? Heh.

Also if a newb isn't going to know about the spec-app process they're probably also not aware of the extended-subs, karma and "subguild fairness" in the first place.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 09:49:05 AM
That isn't mootness. That's an artificial, completely unnecessary barrier. If you're going to say new players should and do have easy access to extended subguilds anyway, surely there's no reason to have a separate application process.

The barrier is "take the extra 5 minutes to send application through request too." and "wait a tad longer"

Even if it was artificial it's practically superficial.  Also you seem to be of the mind that I'm against everyone being able to use extended subguilds. That is very much not the case.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 30, 2016, 06:27:28 PM
I don't think they should be behind Karma...

See? I just find the idea that those extended subs offer too much benifit to vets and upset some sort of balance of "fairness" to be silly and way overblown.

one of my special apps took like a week.

you think staff like me a whole bunch?

i think they just willingly gave me a chance. so.

Rinthel was a believable scumbag who a lot of people had a genuine dislike for just because of actions.  Player plays well, but tends to focus a bit too much on coded gains. - 3/22/10

Not the best sportsman.  Recieved a very good death with Berdrel, lots of RP and drama.  Received kudos for the death.  When sent kudos, replied to email with "Meh." - 3/22/10

Multiple desert elves roam the entire world with little regard to any ethos or consideration for interaction within the tribe.  Watch for extended abuse. - 6/09/10

Don't trust this guy.  He's also involved in discussion of the game, metagaming in an OOC medium.  If it continues, ban will ensue. - 7/16/10

After some thought, I'm banning the account for a week anyway.  They know better, I warned their compatriots that if they continue, I am going to punish them and anyone involved. - 7/16/10

Abusive of situations regarding code, either over emoting for small coded injuries and blaming others, or doing things like raising and lowering barrier to make themselves pass out. - 1/01/12

30 day ban for engaging in a rape plotline without the consent of the other player. - 12/09/12

Unbanned and notified that next offense will result in a permanent ban. - 1/08/13



now after all that happened:

SpecAppGuild flag water_elem set - 6/18/10

SpecAppGuild flag water_elem set - 3/22/11

SpecAppGuild flag water_elem set - 6/19/11

SpecAppGuild flag stone_elem set - 11/13/11


i mean, these were given while i was a completely bad, awful person - and i still got special apps accepted. hell, i got them accepted when i started playing in 2010. note:

Created: Fri Jan 22 16:14:42 2010.

that is the day my account came into existence
SpecAppGuild flag water_elem set - 6/18/10

six months later, special app.

A lot of people seem to be arguing that extended subguilds should not have their karma requirements removed because it's easy to get around those requirements. Besides the fact that this is not universally true (particularly for new players who don't read the GDB), it isn't a logical argument.

Saying that a restriction is easy to get around in no way implies that such a restriction should exist.

An argument for the karma restriction on mundane extended subguilds should look something like this:

Restricting access to superior mundane skills should be done using karma because it will make the game better in the following ways
(insert list of ways the game is made better here).

You should make note of why karma specifically should be the means by which extended guild access is granted, as opposed to other options for limiting their access. You should also make note of why this limited access should exist in the first place.

If you haven't done both of these things, at least in your head, then you may want to take another long look at what your position should really be.

nearly every extended sub is within extended subguild application range because the +three karma bonus applies to extended apps as well.

so pretty much every single extended subguild that isn't magickal in nature is available if you app for it.

Quote from: evilcabbage on April 06, 2016, 01:30:42 PM
nearly every extended sub is within extended subguild application range because the +three karma bonus applies to extended apps as well.

so pretty much every single extended subguild that isn't magickal in nature is available if you app for it.

Is this in response to my post?

I was aware of this information. I do not, however, understand its relevance to anything I said.

Quote from: Narf on April 06, 2016, 01:29:04 PM
A lot of people seem to be arguing that extended subguilds should not have their karma requirements removed because it's easy to get around those requirements. Besides the fact that this is not universally true (particularly for new players who don't read the GDB), it isn't a logical argument.

Saying that a restriction is easy to get around in no way implies that such a restriction should exist.

I think you're misinterpreting why that's being said, at least by me(has anyone else said it?). It's in direct response to the argument that vets are at an appreciably unfair advantage, thus cultivating some sort of atmosphere of that separates new players from veterans. As I already said I think extended subguilds should be available for everyone. I also think Karma should be much easier to get.

But I also think the system as it is now is fine, and caters well to the people who are complaining about what they see as favoritism and player divides.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 06, 2016, 10:29:19 AM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 09:49:05 AM
That isn't mootness. That's an artificial, completely unnecessary barrier. If you're going to say new players should and do have easy access to extended subguilds anyway, surely there's no reason to have a separate application process.

The barrier is "take the extra 5 minutes to send application through request too." and "wait a tad longer"

Even if it was artificial it's practically superficial.  Also you seem to be of the mind that I'm against everyone being able to use extended subguilds. That is very much not the case.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 30, 2016, 06:27:28 PM
I don't think they should be behind Karma...

See? I just find the idea that those extended subs offer too much benifit to vets and upset some sort of balance of "fairness" to be silly and way overblown.

Your subjective assessment of the significance of the barrier (which I disagree with) doesn't justify its continued existence. Small injustices are still injustice. It certainly doesn't speak to "mootness"--it would be moot if mundane extended subguilds were removed. It would be moot if all karma roles were forced through the special application tool.

The ease of access that new players have for these roles really just speaks to the illogic of tying them to karma in the first place.

Quote from: Narf on April 06, 2016, 01:44:21 PM

Quote from: evilcabbage on April 06, 2016, 01:30:42 PM
nearly every extended sub is within extended subguild application range because the +three karma bonus applies to extended apps as well.

so pretty much every single extended subguild that isn't magickal in nature is available if you app for it.

Is this in response to my post?

I was aware of this information. I do not, however, understand its relevance to anything I said.

apparently i can see the future, i was responding to hyzhenhok.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 02:23:07 PM

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 06, 2016, 10:29:19 AM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 09:49:05 AM
That isn't mootness. That's an artificial, completely unnecessary barrier. If you're going to say new players should and do have easy access to extended subguilds anyway, surely there's no reason to have a separate application process.

The barrier is "take the extra 5 minutes to send application through request too." and "wait a tad longer"

Even if it was artificial it's practically superficial.  Also you seem to be of the mind that I'm against everyone being able to use extended subguilds. That is very much not the case.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 30, 2016, 06:27:28 PM
I don't think they should be behind Karma...

See? I just find the idea that those extended subs offer too much benifit to vets and upset some sort of balance of "fairness" to be silly and way overblown.

Your subjective assessment of the significance of the barrier (which I disagree with) doesn't justify its continued existence. Small injustices are still injustice. It certainly doesn't speak to "mootness"--it would be moot if mundane extended subguilds were removed. It would be moot if all karma roles were forced through the special application tool.

The ease of access that new players have for these roles really just speaks to the illogic of tying them to karma in the first place.

Are you even reading my posts? You seem to still think I'm against newbies having extended subguilds. It would be a whole lot easier to have a discussion if you could stop shoving words down my throat long enough to actually process what I'm trying to say to you.

This is what I said in context:

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 01, 2016, 10:43:07 PM
Can you explain yourself a little bit, Vwest? Are you saying you don't like how ext-subs offers more power to vets? That entire argument seems moot because newbies can play every one of the extended sub-guilds. All they have to do is spec-app.

Veterans will always have an advantage. Fact of the matter is there's SO much more to being good at this game than having a good skill-set. Even if noobs had unfettered access to ext-subs, they would still get plowed over by someone with meta knowledge, both for that job promotion and in pvp.

I bolded a few key parts why I think THAT SPECIFIC argument is moot. I also heavily suggest you go look up the definition of moot.

(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/lotr/images/b/bb/Many_ents.png/revision/latest?cb=20070728000817)

moot.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 06, 2016, 04:37:40 PM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 02:23:07 PM

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 06, 2016, 10:29:19 AM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 09:49:05 AM
That isn't mootness. That's an artificial, completely unnecessary barrier. If you're going to say new players should and do have easy access to extended subguilds anyway, surely there's no reason to have a separate application process.

The barrier is "take the extra 5 minutes to send application through request too." and "wait a tad longer"

Even if it was artificial it's practically superficial.  Also you seem to be of the mind that I'm against everyone being able to use extended subguilds. That is very much not the case.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 30, 2016, 06:27:28 PM
I don't think they should be behind Karma...

See? I just find the idea that those extended subs offer too much benifit to vets and upset some sort of balance of "fairness" to be silly and way overblown.

Your subjective assessment of the significance of the barrier (which I disagree with) doesn't justify its continued existence. Small injustices are still injustice. It certainly doesn't speak to "mootness"--it would be moot if mundane extended subguilds were removed. It would be moot if all karma roles were forced through the special application tool.

The ease of access that new players have for these roles really just speaks to the illogic of tying them to karma in the first place.

Are you even reading my posts? You seem to still think I'm against newbies having extended subguilds. It would be a whole lot easier to have a discussion if you could stop shoving words down my throat long enough to actually process what I'm trying to say to you.

This is what I said in context:

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 01, 2016, 10:43:07 PM
Can you explain yourself a little bit, Vwest? Are you saying you don't like how ext-subs offers more power to vets? That entire argument seems moot because newbies can play every one of the extended sub-guilds. All they have to do is spec-app.

Veterans will always have an advantage. Fact of the matter is there's SO much more to being good at this game than having a good skill-set. Even if noobs had unfettered access to ext-subs, they would still get plowed over by someone with meta knowledge, both for that job promotion and in pvp.

I bolded a few key parts why I think THAT SPECIFIC argument is moot. I also heavily suggest you go look up the definition of moot.

You are arguing that something that costs $1 is free because it's inexpensive. You are wrong.

i do not see the point you are making, hyzhen. all he is saying is that veterans will always have an advantage.

newbies can still extended app.

it takes roughly six months, at best, to earn your first point of karma.

that unlocks more options.

it is a natural progression. extended subguilds are more powerful than their counterparts, considerably so.

ever seen a warrior/slipknife before? no? that's because they probably killed you before you realized what was happening.

newbies need time to get used to the game before they start becoming exposed to offerings of greater power. it helps them to learn syntax, understand the rp and lore of the world. a newbie can start with a ranger/thief, or a warrior/thug, or a pickpocket/armormaker, and from there he can earn his knocks like everybody else had to.

my question is, why did you not bring this up when extended subguilds became a thing?

To agree with the cabbage is to become one with the eggroll.

Sincerely,
Eggroll

Quote from: evilcabbage on April 06, 2016, 08:49:46 PM
... it is a natural progression. extended subguilds are more powerful than their counterparts, considerably so.

ever seen a warrior/slipknife before? no? that's because they probably killed you before you realized what was happening.

newbies need time to get used to the game before they start becoming exposed to offerings of greater power. it helps them to learn syntax, understand the rp and lore of the world. a newbie can start with a ranger/thief, or a warrior/thug, or a pickpocket/armormaker, and from there he can earn his knocks like everybody else had to.

my question is, why did you not bring this up when extended subguilds became a thing?

This is a much better argument. It has a premise and a consequence for the game, as well as something to connect the two.

And for the most part, I concur. There is an advantage in not making mundane extended subguilds available to everyone all the time. The part I disagree with is that the limiting mechanism should be karma. When the extended subguilds initially debuted the primary limiting mechanism to them was special applications. Everyone got the same number, and for the most part brand new players (people that might be coming from purely Hack and Slash games) didn't bother with them. While karma did come into play if you wanted to play an extended subguild plus something else, for the most part it wasn't nearly as relevant as  how many special applications you had left that year.

Under this system the extended subguilds were a little extra something that any player could get access to once in a while in roughly equal proportions across karma levels.

Compared with all karma-required options, extended subguilds are unique. All of the existing karma options have some sort of drawback to them and an innate flavor that needs to be reflected by a player with some degree of experience. Extended subguilds have no innate flavor, and have no coded or rp-related drawbacks. They are different in this way than everything that's come before, and that's why I think that staff would do well to divest them from the Karma system alltogether. Linking them to the karma system inarguably ties character power to karma. No matter what you enjoy playing, no matter what role you want to fill, you'll now be able to do the coded portion of it better if you have karma.

To me this is not what the karma system was ever supposed to be about, and making karma characters just flat out superior to non-karma characters will taint the experience of some new players and even a few old ones. And what do you gain for this? Just a little bit of simplicity because you don't want to come up with a more suitable system.

Your bolded assertion isn't true Narf.

If I want to play the role of a person who works in a GMH as a crafter, there is no part of the subguilds that will make me play that role any better, codedly, than the mundane, ordinary Merchant main guild. It won't matter which subguild I pick, none of them will help me be a better crafter, because none of them have anything I'll need as a master crafter that I can't get from the main guild.

If I want to play the role of a Militia soldier, no subguild will let me play that (codedly) better than a mundane warrior main guild. There are also mundane subguilds I can select that will complement the warrior guild, without my having to revert to karma use.

The same is true for a ranger employed by a GMH as a hunter.

Remember - those magick subguilds can only help you if you don't mind risking being caught as a magicker, and GMHs and ALL "publically-acceptable" clans otehr than Oash do -not- hire magickers. So you'd have to hide it - which means you'd never be able to use it in the presence of your co-workers, or you'd have to get gemmed and get tossed out of the clan (or killed).

Sure you could pick a sneaky-type extended subguild for your ranger but it's not going to make you a better ranger, codedly. Merchant/sneaky-ext-subguild won't make you a better master crafter. And so on and so forth.

The main guilds that are still in existence, are the best at what they are. No subguild will make them better than that, if you choose to play the skillset as a whole rather than the sum of its parts.

Quote from: Lizzie on April 06, 2016, 10:13:02 PM
Your bolded assertion isn't true Narf.

If I want to play the role of a person who works in a GMH as a crafter, there is no part of the subguilds that will make me play that role any better, codedly, than the mundane, ordinary Merchant main guild. It won't matter which subguild I pick, none of them will help me be a better crafter, because none of them have anything I'll need as a master crafter that I can't get from the main guild.

If I want to play the role of a Militia soldier, no subguild will let me play that (codedly) better than a mundane warrior main guild. There are also mundane subguilds I can select that will complement the warrior guild, without my having to revert to karma use.

The same is true for a ranger employed by a GMH as a hunter.

Remember - those magick subguilds can only help you if you don't mind risking being caught as a magicker, and GMHs and ALL "publically-acceptable" clans otehr than Oash do -not- hire magickers. So you'd have to hide it - which means you'd never be able to use it in the presence of your co-workers, or you'd have to get gemmed and get tossed out of the clan (or killed).

Sure you could pick a sneaky-type extended subguild for your ranger but it's not going to make you a better ranger, codedly. Merchant/sneaky-ext-subguild won't make you a better master crafter. And so on and so forth.

The main guilds that are still in existence, are the best at what they are. No subguild will make them better than that, if you choose to play the skillset as a whole rather than the sum of its parts.

This is 100 % truth. Mundane extended subguilds -for the most part-, do not require more trust than other available non- karma options.

If karma is about trust, then most of them should not be karma locked.

If karma is about trust and/or perks, then they should be locked. Perks are not necessarily bad, as long as the method of obtaining them is clear and objective.

For now, the system works fine. Even a day 1 player can special app an extended subguild.  I reckon the wait for that is less than what it used to be.  If it ain't broke don't fix it.

extended subguild apps are generally one week at the most to wait for.

Quote from: Lizzie on April 06, 2016, 10:13:02 PM
Your bolded assertion isn't true Narf.

If I want to play the role of a person who works in a GMH as a crafter, there is no part of the subguilds that will make me play that role any better, codedly, than the mundane, ordinary Merchant main guild. It won't matter which subguild I pick, none of them will help me be a better crafter, because none of them have anything I'll need as a master crafter that I can't get from the main guild.

If I want to play the role of a Militia soldier, no subguild will let me play that (codedly) better than a mundane warrior main guild. There are also mundane subguilds I can select that will complement the warrior guild, without my having to revert to karma use.

The same is true for a ranger employed by a GMH as a hunter.

Remember - those magick subguilds can only help you if you don't mind risking being caught as a magicker, and GMHs and ALL "publically-acceptable" clans otehr than Oash do -not- hire magickers. So you'd have to hide it - which means you'd never be able to use it in the presence of your co-workers, or you'd have to get gemmed and get tossed out of the clan (or killed).

Sure you could pick a sneaky-type extended subguild for your ranger but it's not going to make you a better ranger, codedly. Merchant/sneaky-ext-subguild won't make you a better master crafter. And so on and so forth.

The main guilds that are still in existence, are the best at what they are. No subguild will make them better than that, if you choose to play the skillset as a whole rather than the sum of its parts.

I assure you it is.

1) An extended subguild could be used to get a skill your main guild gets with a higher maximum
2) An extended subguild could be used to get a better branch pattern than your main guild, allowing you to branch a normally difficult to acquire skill more easily
3) An extended subguild could be used to get a skill that is complimentary to your main guild (for instance a higher forage skill for your crafter so they can get their materials)

Main guilds don't start with everything they need to codedly fulfill their roles most often, and subguilds can help with that. Extended subguilds help more.

Finally, even if you absolutely do not care about any skill a subguild can give you, you can play a touched and get some sort of wonky benefit that might potentially help you in a non-skill related capacity.

Be careful with claims about something being useless. There's always someone out there that will have thought of something you didn't.

Edited to note that this is only barely related to my actual point as having the option to play an extended subguild will provide superior options even if they aren't used.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 06, 2016, 08:06:28 PM

You are arguing that something that costs $1 is free because it's inexpensive. You are wrong.
[/quote]

No, I wasn't.  Your inability to understand this has gone from from frustrating to amusing. You just couldn't help but to try and cram even more words down my throat. Hah.

Quote from: Narf on April 06, 2016, 11:41:57 PM

Quote from: Lizzie on April 06, 2016, 10:13:02 PM
Your bolded assertion isn't true Narf.

If I want to play the role of a person who works in a GMH as a crafter, there is no part of the subguilds that will make me play that role any better, codedly, than the mundane, ordinary Merchant main guild. It won't matter which subguild I pick, none of them will help me be a better crafter, because none of them have anything I'll need as a master crafter that I can't get from the main guild.

If I want to play the role of a Militia soldier, no subguild will let me play that (codedly) better than a mundane warrior main guild. There are also mundane subguilds I can select that will complement the warrior guild, without my having to revert to karma use.

The same is true for a ranger employed by a GMH as a hunter.

Remember - those magick subguilds can only help you if you don't mind risking being caught as a magicker, and GMHs and ALL "publically-acceptable" clans otehr than Oash do -not- hire magickers. So you'd have to hide it - which means you'd never be able to use it in the presence of your co-workers, or you'd have to get gemmed and get tossed out of the clan (or killed).

Sure you could pick a sneaky-type extended subguild for your ranger but it's not going to make you a better ranger, codedly. Merchant/sneaky-ext-subguild won't make you a better master crafter. And so on and so forth.

The main guilds that are still in existence, are the best at what they are. No subguild will make them better than that, if you choose to play the skillset as a whole rather than the sum of its parts.

I assure you it is.

1) An extended subguild could be used to get a skill your main guild gets with a higher maximum
2) An extended subguild could be used to get a better branch pattern than your main guild, allowing you to branch a normally difficult to acquire skill more easily
3) An extended subguild could be used to get a skill that is complimentary to your main guild (for instance a higher forage skill for your crafter so they can get their materials)

Main guilds don't start with everything they need to codedly fulfill their roles most often, and subguilds can help with that. Extended subguilds help more.

Finally, even if you absolutely do not care about any skill a subguild can give you, you can play a touched and get some sort of wonky benefit that might potentially help you in a non-skill related capacity.

Be careful with claims about something being useless. There's always someone out there that will have thought of something you didn't.

Edited to note that this is only barely related to my actual point as having the option to play an extended subguild will provide superior options even if they aren't used.

That's just flat out incorrect.

No matter what subguild or extended subguild or stat boost or skill boost you choose, when all is said and done, you will not have a MORE maxed-out [insert mundane main guild] than you would have if you hadn't picked any subguild at all. Main guilds provide the max cap. If a subguild provides a max-cap, it will provide the same max cap that you would've gotten anyway.

Yes, you will see clothworking on your master tailor extended subguild. But you could pick the non-karma-required mundane tailor subguild and see clothworking there too. AND - if you're playing a merchant-guild character, you'll master it whether you picked a master crafter subguild or not. AND - you will have branched it eventually whether you had any kind of crafting subguild or not.

I reiterate: There exists no subguild or extended subguild that will make your merchant-main-guild character any MORE of a merchant main-guild character than he would have been if you had not picked that subguild/extended subguild. They won't be better either. They'll max the skills faster. But those maxed skills will be the exact same maxed skills that you would've had anyway if you hadn't picked those subguilds.

Crafting skills up real fast on most racial wisdoms, for those of you not in that particular know, as well.

Quote from: Vwest on March 31, 2016, 06:57:20 PM
I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me.

I'm late to the game, but I am curious.  Why would your next character be so limited? 

If you have no karma at all, you can spec app, now, for a concept that appeals to you while still playing your current character.  If you're still on this character 3-4 RL months from now?  You can spec app another, then another.  If/When the current character dies, just pick whichever pre-approved concept you want to role with at the time.  You'd have a library of approved apps just waiting.  If you have 1-2 karma you don't even need to follow the above process.

Edited: Wrong thread

Quote from: Lizzie on April 07, 2016, 08:33:46 AM

Quote from: Narf on April 06, 2016, 11:41:57 PM

Quote from: Lizzie on April 06, 2016, 10:13:02 PM
Your bolded assertion isn't true Narf.

If I want to play the role of a person who works in a GMH as a crafter, there is no part of the subguilds that will make me play that role any better, codedly, than the mundane, ordinary Merchant main guild. It won't matter which subguild I pick, none of them will help me be a better crafter, because none of them have anything I'll need as a master crafter that I can't get from the main guild.

If I want to play the role of a Militia soldier, no subguild will let me play that (codedly) better than a mundane warrior main guild. There are also mundane subguilds I can select that will complement the warrior guild, without my having to revert to karma use.

The same is true for a ranger employed by a GMH as a hunter.

Remember - those magick subguilds can only help you if you don't mind risking being caught as a magicker, and GMHs and ALL "publically-acceptable" clans otehr than Oash do -not- hire magickers. So you'd have to hide it - which means you'd never be able to use it in the presence of your co-workers, or you'd have to get gemmed and get tossed out of the clan (or killed).

Sure you could pick a sneaky-type extended subguild for your ranger but it's not going to make you a better ranger, codedly. Merchant/sneaky-ext-subguild won't make you a better master crafter. And so on and so forth.

The main guilds that are still in existence, are the best at what they are. No subguild will make them better than that, if you choose to play the skillset as a whole rather than the sum of its parts.

I assure you it is.

1) An extended subguild could be used to get a skill your main guild gets with a higher maximum
2) An extended subguild could be used to get a better branch pattern than your main guild, allowing you to branch a normally difficult to acquire skill more easily
3) An extended subguild could be used to get a skill that is complimentary to your main guild (for instance a higher forage skill for your crafter so they can get their materials)

Main guilds don't start with everything they need to codedly fulfill their roles most often, and subguilds can help with that. Extended subguilds help more.

Finally, even if you absolutely do not care about any skill a subguild can give you, you can play a touched and get some sort of wonky benefit that might potentially help you in a non-skill related capacity.

Be careful with claims about something being useless. There's always someone out there that will have thought of something you didn't.

Edited to note that this is only barely related to my actual point as having the option to play an extended subguild will provide superior options even if they aren't used.

That's just flat out incorrect.

No matter what subguild or extended subguild or stat boost or skill boost you choose, when all is said and done, you will not have a MORE maxed-out [insert mundane main guild] than you would have if you hadn't picked any subguild at all. Main guilds provide the max cap. If a subguild provides a max-cap, it will provide the same max cap that you would've gotten anyway.

Yes, you will see clothworking on your master tailor extended subguild. But you could pick the non-karma-required mundane tailor subguild and see clothworking there too. AND - if you're playing a merchant-guild character, you'll master it whether you picked a master crafter subguild or not. AND - you will have branched it eventually whether you had any kind of crafting subguild or not.

I reiterate: There exists no subguild or extended subguild that will make your merchant-main-guild character any MORE of a merchant main-guild character than he would have been if you had not picked that subguild/extended subguild. They won't be better either. They'll max the skills faster. But those maxed skills will be the exact same maxed skills that you would've had anyway if you hadn't picked those subguilds.

Different people have different levels of creativity and understandings of the game. New players may think a role involves skills it doesn't need. Veteran players may be able to come up with uses for skills that you haven't thought of. I could tell you right now I can see a few applications of skills that you haven't thought of that would make your crafter better within their role. Maybe not in your eyes, but in mine.

Both will perceive an option for an extended subguild to be superior than not having that option.

Since this isn't about one person, but rather the population of Arm players as a whole I'm going to say that one person's perceptions of what skills a role can use aren't terribly relevant (mine or yours, we're both just one person). Some people might be able to play a role with nothing more than the analyze skill, but basing policy off that player is not going to lead to good policy. Basing policy off of how you as a singular individual would codedly use your skills in one specific role is equally inadvisable.

If the argument is that any kind of non-magick subguild would make you a better crafter (or better anything, let's be real) than an actual guild, that assertion is incorrect, and couldn't stand on three legs if they were made of titanium.  I'd challenge anyone to illustrate with real examples how that would be so.

Maybe I missed the point of that argument, though, in all the verbiage.

Quote from: SuchDragonWow on April 07, 2016, 01:58:15 PM
If the argument is that any kind of non-magick subguild would make you a better crafter (or better anything, let's be real) than an actual guild, that assertion is incorrect, and couldn't stand on three legs if they were made of titanium.  I'd challenge anyone to illustrate with real examples how that would be so.

Maybe I missed the point of that argument, though, in all the verbiage.

I think the real argument is that the extended sub-guilds are better than their associated "normal" sub-guild.  So, all mundane sub-guilds should be available to all characters at character creation regardless of karma level so that all players are of mundane characters are on the same level of playing field.

Quote from: whitt on April 07, 2016, 02:08:27 PM
I think the real argument is that the extended sub-guilds are better than their associated "normal" sub-guild.  So, all mundane sub-guilds should be available to all characters at character creation regardless of karma level so that all players are of mundane characters are on the same level of playing field.

Well put, as an argument against putting them behind the karma gate.  And I think, glossing the above, that the argument for putting them behind the karma gate is roughly:

The extended sub-guilds are better than their associated "normal" sub-guild.  So, all "normal" sub-guilds should be available to all characters at character creation, but extended sub-guilds should be behind a karma gate, for if you are playing a more codedly powerful character (be it via skills from extended sub-guilds, magic, or race) there is more responsibility and trust required.

My own view, if it matters, is that one or two karma seems reasonable.

Quote from: SuchDragonWow on April 07, 2016, 01:58:15 PM
If the argument is that any kind of non-magick subguild would make you a better crafter (or better anything, let's be real) than an actual guild, that assertion is incorrect, and couldn't stand on three legs if they were made of titanium.  I'd challenge anyone to illustrate with real examples how that would be so.

Maybe I missed the point of that argument, though, in all the verbiage.

The crafting subs won't make merchants appreciably better. They can make hunters better: a warrior who can craft swords is not as valuable to Salarr as one who can Master craft swords.  The former is really only good as a warrior; in the context of a merchant house his subguild is actually a negative, consuming materials that other wise would help skill up merchants and mastercrafter subs. The latter, meanwhile, offers salarr both hunting and crafting capabilities. You may not know this at hiring time, but who has more skill-based potential?

@Nauta, if normal subguilds were removed and extended our only options, would extended subguilds still be thought of as so powerful? I think the answer for most, if not all of them, is no. Much of their strength comes from comparing them to the vanilla subs. What then is the reason for karma locking them if not to give karma players code advantages?

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 07, 2016, 02:32:35 PM
What then is the reason for karma locking them if not to give karma players code advantages?

I would wager that 90+% of the active playerbase falls in the 1-2 min. karma range.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 07, 2016, 02:32:35 PM
@Nauta, if normal subguilds were removed and extended our only options, would extended subguilds still be thought of as so powerful? I think the answer for most, if not all of them, is no. Much of their strength comes from comparing them to the vanilla subs. What then is the reason for karma locking them if not to give karma players code advantages?

I don't understand!  Can you rephrase?

If "normal" sub-guilds are removed, and so all we have are extended sub-guilds, then I'd agree that all sub-guilds should be 0 karma, since, like, you need to pick a sub-guild even if you are 0 karma in order to play at all.

I'm operating under the assumption (which could be wrong since I haven't looked closely) that staff set up "normal" sub-guilds to be codedly less powerful than "extended" sub-guilds -- note the major premise in whitt's argument against and my argument for --  "The extended sub-guilds are better than their associated "normal" sub-guild."  I was just saying that the two arguments for and against work if we both accept that premise.

Hence, if extended sub-guilds don't offer enough coded advantage (in the way race and magic does), then yeah, I'd agree: why bother with the karma gate?

I'd reckon closer to 75%, accounting for newbies and vets who just don't have it for whatever reason.

Assuming that the vast majority of players have access to these subs, why are we bothering to gate them at all? The only good argument I've heard for that is the one Fathi mentioned: that some of the combat subs are dangerous enough to warrant some supervision.

@nauta

I'll try. It was a hypothetical meant to demonstrate that extended subguild are only really powerful in comparison to normal subguilds. At least in my opinion. I like what extended subs allow because it's closer to how I'd like skills to be handled, which is breaking out of the cookie cutter archetypes.

Extended subs were set up a long time after the original subguilds. They're simply better (more skills, higher caps) than the older subs.

I'm pretty sure the original extended subguild argument way back when provided that karma would actually turn into a cgp cap and you would "spend" your cgp on better subguilds or races or skill bumps on character creation.

Under that system, veterans would still "win" for having more karma but might still select regular subguilds for a variety of reasons, like cgp not having regenerated or wanting to save their cgp for a different concept (which isn't even the same argument; veterans with karma have always had a similar advantage in terms of being able to more easily play more powerful things).

So I don't really see this merit in the "regular subguilds are inferior forevermore" argument AT THIS POINT. Staff have repeatedly stated that we're in transition. Making all subguilds 0 karma before we've seen the final way the karma system is going to work in the future seems a little silly. Especially if they'll have to change it back later.

(Edit: come on, phone, stop it.)

The time to talk about potential changes is before they happen. The record for getting changes revised after they go in is patchy. Unless there's some serious complaints or unforeseen complications, we're generally stuck with the changes.

I should have been more clear in my OP that I see this as a thought experiment first and foremost. Staff will do what they think is best based on what they know or believe. Which is generally a much more complete picture than we players have to work with. Threads like this are generally just an exercise in howling.

Howling, indeed.  The guild changes haven't even come out, yet.  FWIW, I liked the changes to the normal subs, I thought it made them more interesting and useful.  If anything, I'd advocate getting rid of extended subs altogether, if it's about being fair to low-to-no karma players.

I like having PCs who can do more than one thing more than I do about happy newbies, admittedly.

We need more extended subguild with ride. It's telling that almost all the recent mundane sub changes involved adding ride.

Quote from: whitt on April 07, 2016, 02:08:27 PM

Quote from: SuchDragonWow on April 07, 2016, 01:58:15 PM
If the argument is that any kind of non-magick subguild would make you a better crafter (or better anything, let's be real) than an actual guild, that assertion is incorrect, and couldn't stand on three legs if they were made of titanium.  I'd challenge anyone to illustrate with real examples how that would be so.

Maybe I missed the point of that argument, though, in all the verbiage.

I think the real argument is that the extended sub-guilds are better than their associated "normal" sub-guild.  So, all mundane sub-guilds should be available to all characters at character creation regardless of karma level so that all players are of mundane characters are on the same level of playing field.

There's not a single extended subguild that's better than the comparable subguild, at least that I can see. Crazy talk!

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 07, 2016, 03:00:11 PM
The time to talk about potential changes is before they happen. The record for getting changes revised after they go in is patchy. Unless there's some serious complaints or unforeseen complications, we're generally stuck with the changes.

I should have been more clear in my OP that I see this as a thought experiment first and foremost. Staff will do what they think is best based on what they know or believe. Which is generally a much more complete picture than we players have to work with. Threads like this are generally just an exercise in howling.

(http://pinnest.net/newpinnest/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/137577447745a1d.jpg)

Quote from: Norcal on April 07, 2016, 06:12:38 PM

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 07, 2016, 03:00:11 PM
The time to talk about potential changes is before they happen. The record for getting changes revised after they go in is patchy. Unless there's some serious complaints or unforeseen complications, we're generally stuck with the changes.

I should have been more clear in my OP that I see this as a thought experiment first and foremost. Staff will do what they think is best based on what they know or believe. Which is generally a much more complete picture than we players have to work with. Threads like this are generally just an exercise in howling.

(http://pinnest.net/newpinnest/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/137577447745a1d.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/008dTjR.jpg)

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 07, 2016, 03:00:11 PM
The time to talk about potential changes is before they happen. The record for getting changes revised after they go in is patchy. Unless there's some serious complaints or unforeseen complications, we're generally stuck with the changes.

??? ??? ???

Didn't sorcerers just got more spells (again)?  Didn't the karma levels for the ESG get adjusted after they were put in?  Wasn't the interim process revised several times?  How many times have the family rolecall rules been revised?  It seems to me like staff is actually pretty responsive to feedback over other MUDs I've played (admitting I haven't played another MUD since 2009, but from 2003 to 2009 I played something like 30 of them). 

Anyway, I get the thought experiment aspect.  I have no problem with the thought experiment, my point is that I don't think the argument that mundane subguilds will never be used ever again except by newbies holds much water.

Quote from: SuchDragonWow on April 07, 2016, 03:03:25 PM
Howling, indeed.  The guild changes haven't even come out, yet.  FWIW, I liked the changes to the normal subs, I thought it made them more interesting and useful.  If anything, I'd advocate getting rid of extended subs altogether, if it's about being fair to low-to-no karma players.

Removing ESG's is indeed a viable option.

no it isn't.

I don't see why not, if they're going back and re-examining them all right now, as they appear to be.  (I've seen changes in my skill list over it, yaaay.)

Bump them all up a bit in usefulness...wouldn't that make it less of an issue about the karma wall?

so your plan, after having a bunch of main guilds removed from play, is to remove even more things.

after tuluk closes.

jaxa pah close.

red fangs close.

elementalist guilds are removed.

now you want to remove extended subguilds too, and go back to regular subguilds only?


it is not a smart or productive option.

Well, making extended subguilds 0 karma essentially removes normal subguilds from play.  No one in their right mind would ever pick them.  So where's the beef?

my beef is removing the subguilds themselves.

i do not believe their karma should be lowered.

Quote from: SuchDragonWow on April 07, 2016, 10:56:19 PM
Well, making extended subguilds 0 karma essentially removes normal subguilds from play.  No one in their right mind would ever pick them.  So where's the beef?

There are a few cases where I think picking a normal subguild is still good:

Wanting ride

Wanting extra languages

Otherwise... the old subs are pretty much obsolete.

Remove extended subguilds. Taking into account the revisions to main-guilds, add new subs that go like this:


+warrior
+ranger
+assassin
+etc..


If you main-guild warrior and then pick the +warrior sub you get an appreciable bump to essential warrior skills. If you main-guild assassin and pick +warrior you get a few essential warrior skills with an appreciable skill-cap. So on and so forth.

Extended subguilds are FUN.  They make a PC much more broad in terms of capability and give more immersion.

They just did a revision of certain subguilds.  Those that were not liked or played were removed or modified.  If after a couple years certain subguilds are no longer being played, then they can remove or modify those as well.  Or add new ones, or put the old ones back.

Quote from: evilcabbage on April 07, 2016, 10:52:16 PM
so your plan, after having a bunch of main guilds removed from play, is to remove even more things.

after tuluk closes.

jaxa pah close.

red fangs close.

elementalist guilds are removed.

now you want to remove extended subguilds too, and go back to regular subguilds only?


it is not a smart or productive option.

What nefarious kimchi has said is true.  It's not good to only remove things, especially if it really cuts into the FUN.  However,  while things have been removed, others have defiantly been added such as extended subguilds, fantastic new bits of code, clayworking, improved char gen, new room descriptions etc. Other things that were shuttered, have been reopened  ATV, gith, Tor etc.  I think there is an overall balance so far, and the game is still FUN to play and fresh.

Just don't touch Rangers.

I really hate this concept of "fairness" that's permeating through the GDB lately.  Armageddon (and Zalanthas) is not "fair".  I don't ever want it to be "fair".  The entire game is centered around the concept that life ain't fair.

I want 100 day warrior's to get their heads chopped off by a Templar for being mouthy to the wrong day 10 noble.

I want sorcerers to be obscenely overpowered compared to a mundane, and I want them to feel like little naughty school children compared to a Red Robe of Tektolnes.  

I want that day 1 half-giant to get a lucky hit on the 100 day ranger bad ass, knock them unconscious, and kick their head in because they were stupid enough to think their "skill" could overcome that half-giants naturally born strength.

I want an unbalanced, unfair world, where my characters (and everyone elses) never, ever, feel safe.  I don't want to ever rest easy, now that they've climbed some arbitrary skill curve.  

How can I have this unbalanced, unfair world?  By giving some players outright advantages over others.  That's the definition of inequality...some people need to be better than others.  Who should get those advantages?  The players who've proven time and time again that they wield these advantages in ways that enhance the game rather than shit on it.  The day Armageddon's "powerful" characters are only the ones who achieved that power "fairly" is the day I quit the game.

/rant over

YES.

If you go too far down the road of equitable and fair, you reach (and in some ways I feel we have reached) a point where you're just catering to the lowest common denominator.

Without contrast, you have no conflict, and without conflict, you have stagnation and frustration and boredom.

I get that portions of the playerbase whine a lot when it isn't on "the winning side", but they need to grow up and realize that stories need both winners and losers to function. Staff needs to stop being so terrified of favoritism that they go the entire opposite direction and refuse to let anyone accomplish anything great.

Stories need oppressors and the oppressed. The powerful and the powerless. I've been on both sides, and you NEED both. You really, really do.

The game should definitely not be fair, or people start to feel too safe. Stories stagnate, people get bored, the heart-pounding terror of losing your character starts to be replaced by complacence and friendliness.

I think a lot of the relative fairness or unfairness of the gameworld at current has more to do with culture than code, though.

Quote from: wizturbo on April 08, 2016, 01:40:02 PM
Blurb

All of this.

Quote from: Iiyola on April 08, 2016, 02:09:33 PM

Quote from: wizturbo on April 08, 2016, 01:40:02 PM
Blurb

All of this.

i.e. "Let's make it so stats above Very Good were dependent on Karma."

Limiting lower-karma or newer players to fundamentally restricted characters without any sort of in-character justification for those restrictions does not make for a good game. It makes for an unfair one, but not for the reasons you ladies (and whatever wiz is) think you're championing.

Armageddon is "unfair" because the harshness of the gameworld (monsters that not every PC should be tangling with) and of the social sphere (100 day warrior getting executed by templar for being a derp). These are good, thematically justified sources of unfairness. They give our characters something to struggle against. But they're not equatable to the subguild-based restrictions and limitations that arise when you hold standard and Extended subguilds up next to each other.

Quote from: LauraMars on April 08, 2016, 02:00:13 PM
I think a lot of the relative fairness or unfairness of the gameworld at current has more to do with culture than code, though.

I agree with this.

When people are talking about "fair" in this context, I'm pretty sure they mean OOCly fair.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 08, 2016, 02:26:06 PM
When people are talking about "fair" in this context, I'm pretty sure they mean OOCly fair.

They're inter-connected.  You OOCly trust a player to play characteres who ICly have massive advantages over others.

That can come from Karma, Special Apps, or applying for role calls like the oh-so-sweet, oh-so-juicy Guild Crew Leader role up right now...  Oh my god I'm so tempted to apply.  But alas, I think my current boots fit nicely.

That's actually not what I mean. I mean that people are using "fair" to illustrate that newer players should have all the same opportunities that vets do until proven that they can't handle it.

I'm not saying that's an especially good idea, but people aren't asking for a half-giant to be "fair" in the sense that a 1day HG can kill a 100 day ranger. They're asking to be given a fair opportunity to prove they can play them.

Edit: Which is why I was arguing that noobs CAN have the same opportunities, they just have to spec-app.

They do have a fair opportunity to prove they can play them. Should it be quick and easy? Arguable. Armageddon has a steep learning curve and lots of documentation.

I agree. I actually think the system as it is very fair to new players in this regard.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 08, 2016, 02:39:57 PM
I agree. I actually think the system as it is very fair to new players in this regard.

So do I.  Back in my day, after walking uphill in the snow for ten miles, we didn't get karma for longevity alone.  We also didn't have any guidelines to follow, we just had to hope staff noticed us.

All kidding aside though, the Karma system seems much more fair, and much less arbitrary than it was ten years ago.  It's always going to have flaws, all systems do, but there are other systems in place to help address them.  The special application system is there specifically to let no karma, or low-karma players try out stuff that normally wouldn't be available to them.  This system gets ignored so often on the GDB, but it's the primary way for people to prove their capable of handling karma roles.

What on earth does the IC theme of an unfair world have to do with OOC unfairness that has no logical basis behind it. They are not connected.

The excuses you guys are coming up with to protect an indefensible status quo never cease to amaze.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on April 08, 2016, 03:01:03 PM
What on earth does the IC theme of an unfair world have to do with OOC unfairness that has no logical basis behind it. They are not connected.

The excuses you guys are coming up with to protect an indefensible status quo never cease to amaze.

Quote from: Badkeelz on February 05, 2016, 08:47:55 AM
Old players just scared cause old doesn't mean as much anymore.

Or wouldn't.

Going back to "extended subs are available through special apps," I ask: regardless of how high or how low the hoop is, do we really benefit from making people jump through it?

I'm not worried that 'old doesn't mean as much any more' (lol, what does that even mean).  I'm worried that the game doesn't feel as brutal as it once did and I started playing because I loved that  brutality.

Maybe this is a topic for another thread though, because I don't think it has anything to do with extended subguilds or how much karma they cost or don't cost.

or maybe we've already discussed it recently and my hamster-like attention span has already forgotten

adhira, please post "I could give a shit about fair."

so i can have a new sig.

If we are going to say free access to extended subguilds would make the game too easy for new players, we have to ask:

• Why exactly are veterans being given a less brutal experience? Why should a perk of veteran status be special exclusion from the game's core theme?
• What makes extended subguilds special? The ranger guild should probably be karma locked if we're justifying locking extended subguilds because they make the game easier.
• What other quality-of-life improvements the game has seen in the last 5 years, which have the effect of making the game less harsh, should be rolled back? The water tun in the Byn?
• Should we keep those improvements, but karma gate them?

And yes, I do think keeping extended subguilds karma locked is as silly as it would be to say only karma players can use the Byn water tun.

the same reason we locked magick.

everyone has access to a basic guild and a basic subguild. these are core elements of the game. everyone can choose to use these basic guilds and subguilds.

an extended subguild is -more- flexibility in how you create your character.

you can have a warrior who sneaks and hides nearly as well as an assassin, who can backstab with brutal power, -and- is effective in close combat.

this warrior is more capable than a warrior/thief who can "kind of" sneak around?


the ranger guild should be -something- because it is the most powerful guild.

Honestly, this whole damn argument is predicated on a system that's not finished yet.  These discussions are speculative and ill-timed until the system is fully released.  My rant about fairness wasn't really appropriate for the actual topic of this thread, so, sorry for the derail...I just had to get that "fairness" rant off my chest.

Secondly, the intent was never to have karma players have better versions of the subguilds available 100% of the time for play.   It was supposed to be a CGP system that had a cooldown.  The only reason the extended subguilds were turned on full time is to free up staff time to do other things until the code was in place to manage the extended subguild application process automatically.  I assume that code is being worked on, and someday it will come along and solve this problem.  

If extended subguilds are turned on for everyone, it'll feel like a kick in the teeth when they're gated behind CGP spending in the future.  Better to leave them off imo.

Quote from: evilcabbage on April 08, 2016, 03:50:44 PM
the same reason we locked magick.

everyone has access to a basic guild and a basic subguild. these are core elements of the game. everyone can choose to use these basic guilds and subguilds.

an extended subguild is -more- flexibility in how you create your character.

you can have a warrior who sneaks and hides nearly as well as an assassin, who can backstab with brutal power, -and- is effective in close combat.

this warrior is more capable than a warrior/thief who can "kind of" sneak around?


the ranger guild should be -something- because it is the most powerful guild.

Magick (sub)guilds are karma-gated for more than just "competitive" balance. While they are powerful, they also have heavy roleplay restrictions that require experience and knowledge of the gameworld to properly play out. The player of the Warrior/Slipknife does not need to account for this "cultural balancing" because the idea of a sneaky brute is not as far outside the realm as normal as a warrior who can sling fireballs.

The only roleplay requirement for a combination as powerful as you describe are the need to take the virtual world and other players' enjoyment of the game in to account. Which isn't unique to extended subguilds - it's a requirement of all players. The idea that a warrior/slipknife is more lethal than a plain assassin, or even warrior, is also a little suspect. While subs like Protector, Slipknife, and maybe the Aggressor-class give noticeable increases in power and warrant more oversight, I doubt a ranger/master potter is going to wreak appreciably more havoc on the player base than a ranger/general crafter could.

Quote from: LauraMars on April 08, 2016, 03:25:31 PM
I'm not worried that 'old doesn't mean as much any more' (lol, what does that even mean).  I'm worried that the game doesn't feel as brutal as it once did and I started playing because I loved that  brutality.

Maybe this is a topic for another thread though, because I don't think it has anything to do with extended subguilds or how much karma they cost or don't cost.

or maybe we've already discussed it recently and my hamster-like attention span has already forgotten

Karma is essentially a measure of longevity and performance under staff eyes (which garners the "Trust" that Karma officially tracks). Older Players, with more chances to play with and prove themselves responsible enough to have Karma, generally receive karma.

Far as brutality goes, it'd be an interesting thread that would probably dissolve in to saltiness by page 2. but would be challenging to have since it'd be hard to critique the state of the game now without (vaguely or otherwise) critiquing the characters in the game now. The Brutality of the world is, in part, a reflection of the brutality of the playerbase.

a warrior/slipknife is much more powerful than the standard warrior.

arguing that he is not is like arguing that a ten pound maul is not more powerful than a two pound rock.

I've found them kind of underwhelming, personally. If you really want to be an assassin... play an Assassin. Hell, Assassin/Protector is probably a better combo than warrior/slipknife.

Quote from: wizturbo on April 08, 2016, 01:40:02 PM
I really hate this concept of "fairness" that's permeating through the GDB lately.  Armageddon (and Zalanthas) is not "fair". 

So, you're suggesting that elevating one player above another as an OOC concept is integral and beneficial to keeping the in-game world harsh?

Quote from: Delirium on April 08, 2016, 01:46:16 PM
Stories need oppressors and the oppressed. The powerful and the powerless. I've been on both sides, and you NEED both. You really, really do.

Again. Are you saying having karma should be the difference between who plays the powerful and who plays the powerless?

Because otherwise, I'm not seeing how this has any relevance to the topic at hand.

absolutely not. everyone should be able to play full sorcerers.

right?

no?

well, damn.

there's your answer.

We're not talking about sorcerers.

I'm not even sure what your post was supposed to contribute, beyond ramping up your post count.

Quote from: Vwest on April 08, 2016, 05:29:41 PM

Quote from: wizturbo on April 08, 2016, 01:40:02 PM
I really hate this concept of "fairness" that's permeating through the GDB lately.  Armageddon (and Zalanthas) is not "fair".  

So, you're suggesting that elevating one player above another as an OOC concept is integral and beneficial to keeping the in-game world harsh?

Quote from: Delirium on April 08, 2016, 01:46:16 PM
Stories need oppressors and the oppressed. The powerful and the powerless. I've been on both sides, and you NEED both. You really, really do.

Again. Are you saying having karma should be the difference between who plays the powerful and who plays the powerless?

Because otherwise, I'm not seeing how this has any relevance to the topic at hand.

Quote from: wizturbo on April 08, 2016, 01:40:02 PM
I really hate this concept of "fairness" that's permeating through the GDB lately.  Armageddon (and Zalanthas) is not "fair".  I don't ever want it to be "fair".  The entire game is centered around the concept that life ain't fair.

I want 100 day warrior's to get their heads chopped off by a Templar for being mouthy to the wrong day 10 noble.

I want sorcerers to be obscenely overpowered compared to a mundane, and I want them to feel like little naughty school children compared to a Red Robe of Tektolnes.  

I want that day 1 half-giant to get a lucky hit on the 100 day ranger bad ass, knock them unconscious, and kick their head in because they were stupid enough to think their "skill" could overcome that half-giants naturally born strength.

I want an unbalanced, unfair world, where my characters (and everyone elses) never, ever, feel safe.  I don't want to ever rest easy, now that they've climbed some arbitrary skill curve.  

How can I have this unbalanced, unfair world?  By giving some players outright advantages over others.  That's the definition of inequality...some people need to be better than others.  Who should get those advantages?  The players who've proven time and time again that they wield these advantages in ways that enhance the game rather than shit on it.  The day Armageddon's "powerful" characters are only the ones who achieved that power "fairly" is the day I quit the game.

/rant over

The concept of fair in the gameworld and the concept of fair in the meta of OOC constructs such as guild and subguild are not mutually exclusive, in my opinion.  Feel free to argue that they are, though.  If nothing, I'd entertain that argument.

Edit:  I see this is being discussed, but I haven't had time to read through all the posts.

Quote from: evilcabbage on April 08, 2016, 06:04:32 PM
saellyn is not here right now.


your argument is stupid and invalid. nobody is saying we should get more hp or higher stats.

we are saying that certain mundane subguilds are better than their vanilla counterparts. they offer more power.

in this game, more power is locked behind karma.

that is how it has always been. if you want more power, but you lack karma, you can apply for it with an extended subguild app that takes - at most - a week to approve.

you can do role applications for templars, nobles, gmh members, byn sergeants, arm of the dragon sergeants, guild leaders.....


so. like i said. i do not see the problem. the "better" races are behind karma. the "better" subguilds are behind karma.

there you go.

Thinking that Karma is simply a means of regulating power is a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of what karma is. It does gate power, but that power is always tied to roles that require a higher level of roleplay to do properly (i.e. not run wild over the game world with your karma-derived code advantage). Roles are karma-locked to ensure they're played properly and responsibly.

Extended Subguilds do not have this same justification. They are more powerful compared to normal subguilds, but only in that comparison. You're not required to play an Outdoorsman with more respect to the game world as you are a Hunter. You've simply been given an advantage. You might as well let karma buy more HP or higher attributes at that point.

Again, the problem is extended subguilds are always available.  It makes them just straight upgrades to subguilds, which turns them into a karma-player's permanent advantage.  That's not the long term intent.  They're supposed to be options that karma players can tap into, with their limited CGP.  Being a Slipknife is supposed to be more uncommon than it is.  Once CGP is fully implemented I think they'll be in their proper place.  The only reason things are the way they are now is because it was taking up a lot of staff time to handle extended subguild applications, time that could be better spent.

It's a temporary state.

And just to answer Vwest's question:  

I don't like the way you rephrased my statement to imply some superiority complex.  Words like "elevate" and "above".  You're trying to make it sound like I'm talking from some lofty tower down at the lowly karmaless caste.  It isn't working.  

I don't think Karma players are superior to anyone else.  I said that in order to have a harsh environment, you need to have inequalities.  Those inequalities come in many varieties, most of which have nothing to do with Karma.

1)  Stats.  They're random, for everyone, regardless of karma level.  
2)  Social inequalities by geography.  You choose to play a human from Allanak, you have a social advantage in Allanak.  Want to play a Sun Runner in the Pah?  You're going to have a social advantage in the 'Pah.  Etc.  
3)  Authority inequalities.  You play a sponsored role, you get some authority that comes with it usually.  That authority comes 'born' into the character, you didn't have to earn it through IC actions.
4)  Lastly, coded advantages.  Magick, Extra Skills, Psionics, etc.  These come from Karma, as a proxy for trustworthiness, and a proxy for a player's ability to handle the challenges many of the Karma roles require.

Extended subguilds are in the 4th category.  I think they should stay there.  And I think anyone who doesn't have the Karma to access them can special app up to three times a year to get them until they've earned the karma to keep them available permanently (until CGP systems are implemented that restrict them even for Karma players on a time basis).

1. Please don't flame. While you can criticize the opinions of other people, do so with respect for them as a fellow human.  Unnecessary, flaming, baiting and trolling will be removed and the instigator and respondees may have their posting privileges revoked.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 08, 2016, 06:10:39 PM
You might as well let karma buy more HP or higher attributes at that point.

You chop the red-eyed man on the neck, doing unspeakable damage!

You chop the red-eyed man on the neck, doing unspeakable damage!

You chop the red-eyed man on the neck, doing unspeakable damage!

You chop the red-eyed man on the neck, doing unspeakable damage!

You chop the red-eyed man on the neck, doing unspeakable damage!

think (amazed) I've gone through trees faster than this guys neck...

I wouldn't think low levels of karma are hard to earn for people who are responsible to a normal degree. It just takes some time.