The problem is that this RP leaks into my RL by asking me to be online at least one hour per day to keep up with drains. During that one hour, I don't get to RP or even add anything pleasant or productive. Just replace the drain.
It's not fun. In a way, the admins feel like they are entitled to my free time and really, I just wish I could be able to enjoy this game again.
If a game isn't fun, make the necessary changes and/or cut out the parts that are making it unfun for you. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
Right now, I don't even see the point in playing this game anymore. And that would pretty much break my character.
The problem is that this RP leaks into my RL by asking me to be online at least one hour per day to keep up with drains. During that one hour, I don't get to RP or even add anything pleasant or productive. Just replace the drain.
It's not fun. In a way, the admins feel like they are entitled to my free time and really, I just wish I could be able to enjoy this game again.
If a game isn't fun, make the necessary changes and/or cut out the parts that are making it unfun for you. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
Right now, I don't even see the point in playing this game anymore. That would pretty much break my character.
RENOUNCE PATRON. Continue to RP being a devoted follower of whichever god your character is currently following, without any of the stress of having to keep up with affinity.
The problem is that this RP leaks into my RL by asking me to be online at least one hour per day to keep up with drains. During that one hour, I don't get to RP or even add anything pleasant or productive. Just replace the drain.
It's not fun. In a way, the admins feel like they are entitled to my free time and really, I just wish I could be able to enjoy this game again.
If a game isn't fun, make the necessary changes and/or cut out the parts that are making it unfun for you. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
I feel like this is overly harsh. The RP behind Alaksanteri's reasoning for wanting to remain in her situation (except for the affinity bit of course) could be incredibly in-depth, especially if it involves her Divine's approval (which could be presumed, given that Alaksanteri hasn't been removed from the Order). If a pretty punishing mechanic like this is essentially ruining her experience and enjoyment of the game, her frustration is completely understandable. The option as it stands for her sounds like it's a case of "destroy this beautiful story you've made for your character or else be miserable every time you log in," and that definitely doesn't sound fair -- especially with the mechanic involved being of a questionable level of harshness.
Tonight amidst the mountaintops And endless starless night Singing how the wind was lost Before an earthly flight
Rancoura said: The RP behind Alaksanteri's reasoning for wanting to remain in her situation (except for the affinity bit of course) could be incredibly in-depth <snip> -- especially with the mechanic involved being of a questionable level of harshness.
RP that was done despite knowing the consequences for doing so. Not harsh at all.
It's a weird idiom. In this case "having your cake" means "being able to look at your cake and admire it/be proud that you have a cake right there", not "having" it in the way that you'd say "I'm going to have some cake today" which means eat it.
EDIT: Even knowing what the idiom is supposed to mean, the actual contents confused me for a long long time.
Rancoura said: The RP behind Alaksanteri's reasoning for wanting to remain in her situation (except for the affinity bit of course) could be incredibly in-depth <snip> -- especially with the mechanic involved being of a questionable level of harshness.
RP that was done despite knowing the consequences for doing so. Not harsh at all.
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
I would consider that a point of debate. I believe she mentioned in a previous point that she thought it wouldn't be so bad.
I'm a little concerned why this is being fought so hard against by other players, as if there is a stake for them involved. Alaksanteri has alluded to the impact that changing her current RP would have on her character. Has she done something horrible for the game that I'm not aware of? If not, why should she be driven away?
Tonight amidst the mountaintops And endless starless night Singing how the wind was lost Before an earthly flight
As an addendum, I realize that if the admins catered to individual players' wants and needs, the game would become a mess. It's not logical, for the health of the game. But because this is a small community, we should really be a little more sympathetic to each other, especially when it comes to mechanics that aren't exactly game-breaking. Again, unless there are personal stakes involved here, I'm really not sure why the pitchforks and torches are out.
Tonight amidst the mountaintops And endless starless night Singing how the wind was lost Before an earthly flight
It's a weird idiom. In this case "having your cake" means "being able to look at your cake and admire it/be proud that you have a cake right there", not "having" it in the way that you'd say "I'm going to have some cake today" which means eat it.
EDIT: Even knowing what the idiom is supposed to mean, the actual contents confused me for a long long time.
"One cannot or should not try to have two incompatible things." Is the correct way of looking at it. For example: Being in an order, but not in the city said order is linked to. Incompatible.
Rancoura said: The RP behind Alaksanteri's reasoning for wanting to remain in her situation (except for the affinity bit of course) could be incredibly in-depth <snip> -- especially with the mechanic involved being of a questionable level of harshness.
RP that was done despite knowing the consequences for doing so. Not harsh at all.
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
I would consider that a point of debate. I believe she mentioned in a previous point that she thought it wouldn't be so bad.
I'm a little concerned why this is being fought so hard against by other players, as if there is a stake for them involved. Alaksanteri has alluded to the impact that changing her current RP would have on her character. Has she done something horrible for the game that I'm not aware of? If not, why should she be driven away?
This is the same stance/problem I'm in with my character.
Mechanically, I didn't know order affinity would be so bad. I knew Raeri had been (is?) part of Maylea's order and that he was even an Avatar for Maylea for a while while part of Celest (when I left he also was part of Celest and had the ability to classflex to Spiritsinger!). He never really brought it up like it was a problem or anything, so I didn't think anything of it.
Then Darvellan joined the game and my character instantly clicked with him. It happened organically and made sense for her.
Then the order affinity ticks came in.
It would not make sense RP-wise to pull her out of his Order over that. When I came back, I knew order affinity would be a problem. But my character wouldn't just stop caring about Darvellan because "lol order affinity." And she is heavily a Seren, moving her to Celest would make no sense for her. None whatsoever.
I like RPing with Darvellan. He's a cool God. My character follows Him and loves Him (as one might love their God). Pulling her out of his order over order affinity makes no sense. So what should I do?
Keep my mouth shut and accept it?
Or try to fight for a change of some sort?
Estarra said that order affinity will remain, but never said "there will never be a time where I create and offer an artifact for sale that lets you deal with order affinity."
So I take the angle that's open to me and go for it, instead of just sitting and pouting. I mean I'm still sitting and pouting, but I'm also attempting to engage in a conversation about it on the forums, trying to get Estarra's attention, trying to get Estarra to make a ruling on the possibility of an artifact.
Yeah, if Estarra says "there will never be an artifact for this" I'll take it with as much grace as possible and move on. But I haven't seen that yet, and I don't understand why anybody would be so opposed to its existence in the first place.
Because you are asking for game mechanics to change to suit your RP, RP that is way more malleable, subjective, and quicker to change.
Game mechanics that are not game-breaking in the least. It's not like I'm asking for Selenity to get a 10s stun on her lyre with no cooldown. I'm asking for the ability to enjoy my RP more thoroughly for a real, tangible price.
Re: following a God outside His or Her (dis)Order.
It's been done, quite effectively, before. See the attempted Fainite coup of Glomdoring, Tremula's continued devotion to Drocilla while in Hallifax, Gaudi, and Celest of all places, Munsia's Morg devotion, or Daraius being loyal to Elostian in spite of His being mostly all dead.
The bottom line is that the God you are devoted to has made a stance. Their interests closely align with x org. Yours apparently are in conflict with that interest. While this makes for incredibly rich soil for character growth, that split loyalty has a cost. Presently that cost comes in the form of an essence drain and a malus to offerings. Could one of those stand to go? Sure, but my money is on the malus if anything. Personally I'd prefer it the admin could set up to two orgs that have no penalty and a lesser penalty, based on the tenets they espouse. (Like, Isunites in Halifax generate essence as usual, those in Celest neither generate nor decay essence, those in Glomdoring loose essence, but at half the rate the other three orgs do. For Maylea it's Serenwilde, Hallifax, and Gaudi or something. For Morg it's Mag, Celest (Hajamin), and Gaudiguch, etc.) These should be more or immutable, and less about forming alliances and more about how close each org is to aligning with the God(dess).
The cost is just bizarre. Affinity could VERY easily be retooled to be less personally punishing to individual players and to make more sense while accomplishing the same goals.
Why can a Gaudi offer to Lisaera at 100% efficiency but a Gaudi who joins Lisaera's order both drains essence AND offers at 50% efficiency. Joining an order makes you worse at offering to that god, and that makes zero sense no matter how you slice it.
Because you are asking for game mechanics to change to suit your RP, RP that is way more malleable, subjective, and quicker to change.
Game mechanics that are not game-breaking in the least. It's not like I'm asking for Selenity to get a 10s stun on her lyre with no cooldown. I'm asking for the ability to enjoy my RP more thoroughly for a real, tangible price.
It's wildnodes time! Serenwilde and New Celest are neck and neck! There's ten minutes left, but Celest has one more node than Seren. The Celestians have raised a shrine to Darvellan, and activated ALL THE POWERS. But what's this? Selenity can just waltz in and grab the node like it's nbd, because she's in His order.
Mechanical powers not affecting people aren't even the biggest issue. It's when there are actual RP conflicts of interests and people's feelings get hurt because suddenly their org is no longer friendly with their patron's org and they find themselves being outcast by other characters or the patron themselves as a result.
Shades of grey are best left to character RP, not mechanics. The power system, affinity, etc clearly point to this. The fact that it hasn't been deleted for literal years after every single rant about this should tell you something. Take the hint.
With that said, I think we should take it a step further and delete the enemy list. Base it off org membership (all not of your org = enemy) and call it good. This will further reinforce the idea of choosing a side, mechanically discourages alliances, and adds abother interesting dynamic to group combat.
I mean a lot of things have been complained about for years that did end up getting changed. Take the hint that not everything is set in stone and that the game evolves for the better, especially when it comes to the life of a business. If enough people have found affinity to be too much of a hindrance, the business should offer a way to ease that concern.
There is also a very easy mechanical fix to the perceived problem: get rid of affinity, members of an order that are not apart of the "assigned" organization can't use powers. That will solve all their problems about game mechanics.
Besides, I don't know how anyone can argue against changing affinity outside of mechanical issues, the argument has boiled down to the timeless argument of "back in my day we had to go through 3 feet of snow uphill both ways." If you want to make a roleplay argument against someone in your organization being associated with a certain God, that belongs in game.
2014/04/19 01:38:01 - Leolamins drained 2000000 power to raise Silvanus as a Vernal Ascendant.
2014/07/23 05:01:29 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Munsia as a Vernal Ascendant.
2015/05/24 06:03:07 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Arimisia as a Vernal Ascendant.
2015/05/24 06:03:58 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Lavinya as a Vernal Ascendant.
Mechanical powers not affecting people aren't even the biggest issue. It's when there are actual RP conflicts of interests and people's feelings get hurt because suddenly their org is no longer friendly with their patron's org and they find themselves being outcast by other characters or the patron themselves as a result.
Funny enough, this is something I'm okay coming face to face with. I'm not against rp adversity so long as it makes sense and isn't wholly based on a single mechanic that has a possible or potential work around aside from "leave the order or leave the org." And currently the potential and possibility for an artifact to deal with this does exist until Estarra says elsewise.
Mechanical powers not affecting people aren't even the biggest issue. It's when there are actual RP conflicts of interests and people's feelings get hurt because suddenly their org is no longer friendly with their patron's org and they find themselves being outcast by other characters or the patron themselves as a result.
Funny enough, this is something I'm okay coming face to face with. I'm not against rp adversity so long as it makes sense and isn't wholly based on a single mechanic that has a possible or potential work around aside from "leave the order or leave the org." And currently the potential and possibility for an artifact to deal with this does exist until Estarra says elsewise.
You might be okay with this happening, but I can guarantee that most, if not all, of the admins who play god roles really don't want to have to deal with this potential drama.
Mechanical powers not affecting people aren't
even the biggest issue. It's when there are actual RP conflicts of
interests and people's feelings get hurt because suddenly their org is
no longer friendly with their patron's org and they find themselves
being outcast by other characters or the patron themselves as a result.
That's definitely an issue! It has nothing to do with making Affinity a
mechanic that makes more sense, though (as per Enyalida's statement).
As
I said earlier, I do understand the reasoning behind it. I was, after
all, in Glomdoring when we had the Fain-Invasion. It was a huge amount
of headache drama that poisoned relations between Glomdoring and
Magnagora for years.
If you do risky RP (going with people / Gods
in other organizations) you risk getting burned. You won't always be
able to enjoy your RP.
Even with that, I'd still like to see
Affinity's mechanics adjusted. They can still be punitive. I'd just
prefer something that isn't so... bizarre to me, like the 50% offerings.
Mechanical powers not affecting people aren't
even the biggest issue. It's when there are actual RP conflicts of
interests and people's feelings get hurt because suddenly their org is
no longer friendly with their patron's org and they find themselves
being outcast by other characters or the patron themselves as a result.
That's definitely an issue! It has nothing to do with making Affinity a
mechanic that makes more sense, though (as per Enyalida's statement).
As
I said earlier, I do understand the reasoning behind it. I was, after
all, in Glomdoring when we had the Fain-Invasion. It was a huge amount
of headache drama that poisoned relations between Glomdoring and
Magnagora for years.
If you do risky RP (going with people / Gods
in other organizations) you risk getting burned. You won't always be
able to enjoy your RP.
Even with that, I'd still like to see
Affinity's mechanics adjusted. They can still be punitive. I'd just
prefer something that isn't so... bizarre to me, like the 50% offerings.
I'll take any change in the positive. I'm just aiming big because they might give a little if you ask for big enough.
@Estarra if the concern is a that a 'foreign' order may take over a org or guild. Then perhaps the approach of barring them from holding office or upping affinity if they hold an office would work.
You could even do something like, 25% percent of current affinity loss as base and further modifiers added for tying yourself more deeply to a distant organization (up to 200% or even 400% percent of current for becoming city leader).
I always got the impression affinity was designed to be a deterrent to the divinities themselves, rather than the players - it rather just happens that they are intertwined.
If your Divinity of choice is not expressly expecting you to perform upkeep, it seems probable that they are accepting the fact that you are creating a net essence loss, and it is not worth fretting over unless they do acknowledge it.
That said, if I were in such a position I would have a hard time accepting that perspective myself - especially if I could see the offeringlogs and know very surely how much I am costing.
If/when the people up in Havens might decide they want a change, I'm sure they'll let us know and it won't have costs attached to it.
Comments
Tonight amidst the mountaintops
And endless starless night
Singing how the wind was lost
Before an earthly flight
Can't have your cake and eat it too.
Discord: Rey#1460
Ixion tells you, "// I don't think anyone else had a clue, amazing form."
EDIT: Even knowing what the idiom is supposed to mean, the actual contents confused me for a long long time.
I'm a little concerned why this is being fought so hard against by other players, as if there is a stake for them involved. Alaksanteri has alluded to the impact that changing her current RP would have on her character. Has she done something horrible for the game that I'm not aware of? If not, why should she be driven away?
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
"One cannot or should not try to have two incompatible things." Is the correct way of looking at it. For example: Being in an order, but not in the city said order is linked to. Incompatible.
Discord: Rey#1460
Mechanically, I didn't know order affinity would be so bad. I knew Raeri had been (is?) part of Maylea's order and that he was even an Avatar for Maylea for a while while part of Celest (when I left he also was part of Celest and had the ability to classflex to Spiritsinger!). He never really brought it up like it was a problem or anything, so I didn't think anything of it.
Then Darvellan joined the game and my character instantly clicked with him. It happened organically and made sense for her.
Then the order affinity ticks came in.
It would not make sense RP-wise to pull her out of his Order over that. When I came back, I knew order affinity would be a problem. But my character wouldn't just stop caring about Darvellan because "lol order affinity." And she is heavily a Seren, moving her to Celest would make no sense for her. None whatsoever.
I like RPing with Darvellan. He's a cool God. My character follows Him and loves Him (as one might love their God). Pulling her out of his order over order affinity makes no sense. So what should I do?
Keep my mouth shut and accept it?
Or try to fight for a change of some sort?
Estarra said that order affinity will remain, but never said "there will never be a time where I create and offer an artifact for sale that lets you deal with order affinity."
So I take the angle that's open to me and go for it, instead of just sitting and pouting. I mean I'm still sitting and pouting, but I'm also attempting to engage in a conversation about it on the forums, trying to get Estarra's attention, trying to get Estarra to make a ruling on the possibility of an artifact.
Yeah, if Estarra says "there will never be an artifact for this" I'll take it with as much grace as possible and move on. But I haven't seen that yet, and I don't understand why anybody would be so opposed to its existence in the first place.
It's been done, quite effectively, before. See the attempted Fainite coup of Glomdoring, Tremula's continued devotion to Drocilla while in Hallifax, Gaudi, and Celest of all places, Munsia's Morg devotion, or Daraius being loyal to Elostian in spite of His being mostly all dead.
The bottom line is that the God you are devoted to has made a stance. Their interests closely align with x org. Yours apparently are in conflict with that interest. While this makes for incredibly rich soil for character growth, that split loyalty has a cost. Presently that cost comes in the form of an essence drain and a malus to offerings. Could one of those stand to go? Sure, but my money is on the malus if anything. Personally I'd prefer it the admin could set up to two orgs that have no penalty and a lesser penalty, based on the tenets they espouse. (Like, Isunites in Halifax generate essence as usual, those in Celest neither generate nor decay essence, those in Glomdoring loose essence, but at half the rate the other three orgs do. For Maylea it's Serenwilde, Hallifax, and Gaudi or something. For Morg it's Mag, Celest (Hajamin), and Gaudiguch, etc.) These should be more or immutable, and less about forming alliances and more about how close each org is to aligning with the God(dess).
Why can a Gaudi offer to Lisaera at 100% efficiency but a Gaudi who joins Lisaera's order both drains essence AND offers at 50% efficiency. Joining an order makes you worse at offering to that god, and that makes zero sense no matter how you slice it.
You can't even raise War shrines there, so all you've got are Healing and Shield. I guess a shield shrine wouldn't report that she entered the area?
I mean a lot of things have been complained about for years that did end up getting changed. Take the hint that not everything is set in stone and that the game evolves for the better, especially when it comes to the life of a business. If enough people have found affinity to be too much of a hindrance, the business should offer a way to ease that concern.
There is also a very easy mechanical fix to the perceived problem: get rid of affinity, members of an order that are not apart of the "assigned" organization can't use powers. That will solve all their problems about game mechanics.
Besides, I don't know how anyone can argue against changing affinity outside of mechanical issues, the argument has boiled down to the timeless argument of "back in my day we had to go through 3 feet of snow uphill both ways." If you want to make a roleplay argument against someone in your organization being associated with a certain God, that belongs in game.
As I said earlier, I do understand the reasoning behind it. I was, after all, in Glomdoring when we had the Fain-Invasion. It was a huge amount of headache drama that poisoned relations between Glomdoring and Magnagora for years.
If you do risky RP (going with people / Gods in other organizations) you risk getting burned. You won't always be able to enjoy your RP.
Even with that, I'd still like to see Affinity's mechanics adjusted. They can still be punitive. I'd just prefer something that isn't so... bizarre to me, like the 50% offerings.
Bruh, we need to talk. Daraius is only loyal to Elostian insofar as Elostian is inseparable from the Collective.
Having typed the words "Daraius is only loyal to Elostian" makes me want to cut off my fingers.
Estarra the Eternal says, "Give Shevat the floor please."
Ixion tells you, "// I don't think anyone else had a clue, amazing form."
You could even do something like, 25% percent of current affinity loss as base and further modifiers added for tying yourself more deeply to a distant organization (up to 200% or even 400% percent of current for becoming city leader).
If your Divinity of choice is not expressly expecting you to perform upkeep, it seems probable that they are accepting the fact that you are creating a net essence loss, and it is not worth fretting over unless they do acknowledge it.
That said, if I were in such a position I would have a hard time accepting that perspective myself - especially if I could see the offeringlogs and know very surely how much I am costing.
If/when the people up in Havens might decide they want a change, I'm sure they'll let us know and it won't have costs attached to it.
EDIT: For clarity, -credit costs-