While I'm mostly just lurking, Daedalion's tweet is possibly a reason why people can't have nice things.
Enemy statuses are there for legitimate crimes against an organization. If you start doing it frivolously and with no in-character justification (which there isn't in this case since the person wasn't involved with the raid) then I wouldn't be surprised if you found your ability to enemy folks removed. It's starting to sound like that this needs to happen if people can't control themselves.
This is a bad idea. Orgs are and should be free to set or not set their own criteria for dealing with enemy statuses.
That is not to say that there won't be consequences though. People enemied for stupid reasons often shed any restraint or good will they were holding for that org and likewise being a jerk has it's own set of repercussions.
Getting admin to micromanage this or waste coding time to address an occasional annoyance is no where near justified.
While I'm mostly just lurking, Daedalion's tweet is possibly a reason why people can't have nice things.
Enemy statuses are there for legitimate crimes against an organization. If you start doing it frivolously and with no in-character justification (which there isn't in this case since the person wasn't involved with the raid) then I wouldn't be surprised if you found your ability to enemy folks removed. It's starting to sound like that this needs to happen if people can't control themselves.
This is a bad idea. Orgs are and should be free to set or not set their own criteria for dealing with enemy statuses.
That is not to say that there won't be consequences though. People enemied for stupid reasons often shed any restraint or good will they were holding for that org and likewise being a jerk has it's own set of repercussions.
Getting admin to micromanage this or waste coding time to address an occasional annoyance is no where near justified.
Is there a way a city leader or guild master can remove your right to enemy people temporarily (without busting you down to CR 1 or taking away security? ) I think that might be a workable solution if this is actually getting to be a problem.
That would be cool! We've suggested custom 'probabtions' for orgs before, where you can selectively take away privs from people who need punishing, something like that could easily handle enemy status-giving.
I have a serious pet peeve about people using the term "level" instead of "circle of experience" in-game, as I'm sure some people have learned. I get little happy feelings when people actually use "circle" without being corrected first.
Tonight amidst the mountaintops And endless starless night Singing how the wind was lost Before an earthly flight
Aside from the door slamming stupidity (doors should just be -dematerialized- during peaced revolts if people are going to be that way), that revolt was actually very entertaining. It's rare Gaudiguch has all of its duckies in neat little rows like that, looking forward to maybe some more wins.
Woo, things.
Crumkane, Lord of Epicurean Delights says, "WAS IT INDEED ON FIRE, ERITHEYL."
-
With a deep reverb, Contemptible Sutekh says, "CEASE YOUR INFERNAL ENERGY, ERITHEYL."
Gaudiguch did a really good job. It was pretty neat to see the turnabout and realise the inevitable result before it happened, but still fun in the course of things.
Ragniliff wanted to explain this to you a week or so ago, but just happened to miss you. According to her, buffs like charismaticaura, oils etc give a chance to double the ego damage of an influence attack you do. The proc rate that each of them adds is dependant on your charisma, apparently the lower your cha, there's more chance for it to fire, though there are some that have a flat rate, like charismaticaura, but basically, when you are reaching the higher levels of charisma, you can get unlucky and end up feeling like you take longer to influence due to a streak of bad luck.
This. Is probably why the mobs I influence end up getting willfull. >:( Thanks, @Lerad.
Viravain, Lady of the Thorns shouts, "And You would seize Me? Fool! I am the Glomdoring! I am the Wyrd, and beneath the cloak of Night, the shadows of the Silent stir!"
I think I recall an old thing Estarra said about keeping revolts mainly for debaters/influencers. Outright combat is left to Domoths, wildnodes, flares, and raiding. Don't step on The Vision!
No thanks! Doors are really the only way to stop runners during peaced revolts.
Uh, no?
Open door s;s.
^-- This beats close door spam, so close door spam is pretty close to useless in a peaced revolt. It's just annoying, it doesn't actually serve any useful purpose. If someone wants out they will get out.
No thanks! Doors are really the only way to stop runners during peaced revolts.
Uh, no?
Open door s;s.
^-- This beats close door spam, so close door spam is pretty close to useless in a peaced revolt. It's just annoying, it doesn't actually serve any useful purpose. If someone wants out they will get out.
Your conductive amplifier short circuits and breaks apart.
The disc of antigravity particles beneath your feet fails, breaking up.
You lose your ionic charge as the cloud around you dissipates.
Your sizzling cloud of electromagnetism snaps away in an instant with a crackle and a pop.
The positronic particles surrounding you veer off in every direction, leaving your vicinity.
You may submit up to 3 public designs and 3 cartel designs for the Clan of Pavok Artisanry this
period.
You may submit up to 3 public designs and 3 cartel designs for the Clan of Gilded Iris this period.
A fold appears in the tapestry of fate, heralding the birth of a new year as the Fates pen the next
chapter into the neverending story that is Lusternia.
Midnight shadows coalesce around a new day, and Mother Night embraces the land in utter darkness.
It is now the 1st of Estar, 351 years after the Coming of Estarra.
Welp, that was exciting.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
While I'm mostly just lurking, Daedalion's tweet is possibly a reason why people can't have nice things.
Enemy statuses are there for legitimate crimes against an organization. If you start doing it frivolously and with no in-character justification (which there isn't in this case since the person wasn't involved with the raid) then I wouldn't be surprised if you found your ability to enemy folks removed. It's starting to sound like that this needs to happen if people can't control themselves.
This is a bad idea. Orgs are and should be free to set or not set their own criteria for dealing with enemy statuses.
That is not to say that there won't be consequences though. People enemied for stupid reasons often shed any restraint or good will they were holding for that org and likewise being a jerk has it's own set of repercussions.
Getting admin to micromanage this or waste coding time to address an occasional annoyance is no where near justified.
You didn't really provide a reason as to why it's bad. It's not hard nor time-consuming for an administrator to say, "Hey, uh. You should probably not enemy people just because they are standing in Faethorn and minding their own business." Yes, I've seen people enemy for this before. Point is, organizations will always be free to set their own criteria for enemying. I'm not disputing that. What I am disputing is that the criteria has to make sense as a crime against the organization. What your argument would basically allow is a slippery slope situation that people are proving isn't the most adequate means of handling enemy statuses. They're getting thrown about to the point of it being a little crazy. Be sensible about how you enemy or the privilege should be taken away. That simple.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
edited April 2013
<P>Asking OOC administrators to police IG actions based on RP and character/org beliefs based on third party criteria on what is acceptable or not is a terrible idea on so many levels. Org leadership polices enemy statuses. Not the Oneiroi or whatever.</P> <P> </P> <P>I have an idea. How about people stop collectively feeling entitled to not be an enemy of any given org just because they feel they shouldn't be or don't like the reasoning. If it's that important to you to not be enemied to Glom or Mag, join the org. That way you can't be enemied unless you do something to get kicked out. Let's just all agree that this is a conflict game, and that each org has a goal and that goal eventually includes the elimination of every other org. So basically every org wants you dead sooner or later. Pretty much everyone is everyone else's enemy until an org decides to trust you to whatever degree they want and not murder you <EM>for now. </EM></P> <P> </P> <P>My only wish is that people would be blunt with their enemy statuses. "Member of Hallifax, Hallifax tries to steal our domoths, 1+1=2." Though I suspect people would still complain that a enemy line in a text game ruined their day and is so unfair.</P> <P> </P> <P>edit: "Because I feel like I should be able to do what I want, unhindered by in game politics and character RP," is not a legit reason to argue against being enemied. Which is the overwhelming number of complaints.</P>
Comments
Tonight amidst the mountaintops
And endless starless night
Singing how the wind was lost
Before an earthly flight
-
-
-
Tonight amidst the mountaintops
And endless starless night
Singing how the wind was lost
Before an earthly flight
Tonight amidst the mountaintops
And endless starless night
Singing how the wind was lost
Before an earthly flight
Open door s;s.
^-- This beats close door spam, so close door spam is pretty close to useless in a peaced revolt. It's just annoying, it doesn't actually serve any useful purpose. If someone wants out they will get out.
Lag? What lag?
Welp, that was exciting.
<P> </P>
<P>I have an idea. How about people stop collectively feeling entitled to not be an enemy of any given org just because they feel they shouldn't be or don't like the reasoning. If it's that important to you to not be enemied to Glom or Mag, join the org. That way you can't be enemied unless you do something to get kicked out. Let's just all agree that this is a conflict game, and that each org has a goal and that goal eventually includes the elimination of every other org. So basically every org wants you dead sooner or later. Pretty much everyone is everyone else's enemy until an org decides to trust you to whatever degree they want and not murder you <EM>for now. </EM></P>
<P> </P>
<P>My only wish is that people would be blunt with their enemy statuses. "Member of Hallifax, Hallifax tries to steal our domoths, 1+1=2." Though I suspect people would still complain that a enemy line in a text game ruined their day and is so unfair.</P>
<P> </P>
<P>edit: "Because I feel like I should be able to do what I want, unhindered by in game politics and character RP," is not a legit reason to argue against being enemied. Which is the overwhelming number of complaints.</P>