But there is an element of "light" (not Light light, but "light" as in opposing "dark") in the sense of maintaining "purity", not allowing taint/undeath in residents, and no blood sacrifices.
It's "neutral" in the sense of "we want to be left alone" but there's also the element of "we're the last pure forest" which is not a neutral stance to take imo. Regardless, I don't think Niwynne's statement was that deep and the point of their comment had nothing to do with any of this.
To say though, the blood sacrifice is probably being referred to necromantic blood sacrifices etc. However, there does exist blood sacrifices in nature in the form of giving back to the earth of the animals being sacrificed-in a sacred ritual fashion. I believe White Hart is an example of life and death cycles. (I don't remember exactly) but from the resources and bits of lore I learned as a Serenwilder, it further reiterates the differences between blood sacrifices as one is natural and the other is perverse and goes against nature and life. So in essence, I can see and understand what is the neutral line without the crossing over into the other end of blood sacrifices.
Man, it's almost like my original post! Glad someone agrees! My mergers probably would be Mag/Halli, Celest/Gaudi, Seren/Glom.
Just think...Mag/Halli could give us the Jaeger to fight the soulless! Science with machinery, GIMME!
An alternative I posted ages ago was Celest/Halli, Mag/Gaudi, and Seren/Glom.
- The forests follow the line that Maeve is redirecting their power to make them stronger than any of them would be individually, elevating themselves up with the aim of spreading beyond the forests and connecting to all the natural places of all worlds. The ascendancy of the forests in this way would in turn provide a catalyst for the cities to respond to.
- Merge Celest and Hallifax together as a "Dynara" focused org, you can play with the concepts of faith and science within the org. Order and Creation. Sainthood, ascension, extratemporal states, etc all being methods to defy destruction and gain eternal life.
- Combine Gaudiguch and Magnagora as a "Magnora" focused org, wheeling and dealing with entities that would consume you if you took a step wrong, the forces of Chaos and Destruction. They'd bargain become heralds if they could for the power and glory it'd bring them.
They're not perfect, cause nothing ever would be in this theoretical situation, but it would ideally align the orgs along three thematic lines. If the game ever expanded options you'd also be able to do stuff like Magmamancers, Horror guardians that merge Nil with the Vortex, maybe guardians that create light-crystal constructs.
Perhaps I'm a sucker for theatrics, but all of this sounds like a storyline that me as a player would find an abundance of role-play in. Some conflicted, some comforting, but overall I think the game would actually benefit from a "end all for do over" type event. It would be something new and exciting but also devastating in some ways for sure. If it's ever on the table to start 'merging' orgs then the option of would-be apocalypse events/new enemy/new widespread problem should be considered.
Either way, I definitely like the above theory about Celest/Halli, Mag/Gaudi, Seren/Glom.
But there is an element of "light" (not Light light, but "light" as in opposing "dark") in the sense of maintaining "purity", not allowing taint/undeath in residents, and no blood sacrifices.
It's "neutral" in the sense of "we want to be left alone" but there's also the element of "we're the last pure forest" which is not a neutral stance to take imo. Regardless, I don't think Niwynne's statement was that deep and the point of their comment had nothing to do with any of this.
To say though, the blood sacrifice is probably being referred to necromantic blood sacrifices etc. However, there does exist blood sacrifices in nature in the form of giving back to the earth of the animals being sacrificed-in a sacred ritual fashion. I believe White Hart is an example of life and death cycles. (I don't remember exactly) but from the resources and bits of lore I learned as a Serenwilder, it further reiterates the differences between blood sacrifices as one is natural and the other is perverse and goes against nature and life. So in essence, I can see and understand what is the neutral line without the crossing over into the other end of blood sacrifices.
It's a big topic really, but I'd say it's more that the seren style is a symbolic act that isn't just drawing on the power of the act but also from the connections it has to nature as a whole. Even self-sacrifice could be seen as reflective of behaviour such as animals risking their lives to protect their young/etc.
Where I guess, necromantic style is potentially more on the lines of killing someone to harvest their power?
Like the concept but I worry that having an odd number of orgs will have the same issue that sort of happened early on in Lusternia with it being 2v1 all the time.
Like the concept but I worry that having an odd number of orgs will have the same issue that sort of happened early on in Lusternia with it being 2v1 all the time.
I am not sure if it is still the case in Game Design, but, for ages, DoAC was pointed to as why 3 orgs were better than two sides.
I don't see it being a 2v1 race, I'd see it as a 1v1v1 kind of deal. Sure there would be a possible team-up, but soone enough betray that to get your win.
Like the concept but I worry that having an odd number of orgs will have the same issue that sort of happened early on in Lusternia with it being 2v1 all the time.
I don't think that would be an issue, really.
From a PVP standpoint, I'd be content with it literally being a free-for-all. 1v1v1 would just introduce a wildcard factor that x org can jump in and attack the other two while they're fighting, or any number of possible interceptions.
Granted, I'm still perfectly cool with the idea of all orgs go poof, everyone's forced to go and build something new which could also turn into a 1v1v1 anyway. The idea is, we have too many orgs.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but unlike DoAC which I don't think allows for orgs to ally, in Lusternia there's nothing mechanically to stop two factions just allying against the third, and as orgs are controlled by players, they can just draw up alliance agreements regardless of what the intention of the devs are.
We've had 'admin enforced' alliances and enemies before in the history of Lusternia. It is rare, but simply put, the Divine are the top level of any Org, so the players listen to them. It could just be a thing where there's a war between the returning Elder Gods that causes the destruction for all I care, and they then mandate alliances will not happen, none can be trusted etc.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but unlike DoAC which I don't think allows for orgs to ally, in Lusternia there's nothing mechanically to stop two factions just allying against the third, and as orgs are controlled by players, they can just draw up alliance agreements regardless of what the intention of the devs are.
In the current environment sure, if the game went to the point of intentionally reworking down to three orgs you could probably also see some reworking of conflict mechanisms to mitigate how useful an alliance could be to you.
For example, incentivise winning to the point that you see behaviours such as Org A pulls ahead in a fight so Org B starts focusing them but Org C quietly starts going for the objective and takes the win from the other two, which then makes A and B want to hit C next time. Figure out something so that B didn't say "well C is our allies so we'll hit A hard so C can get the objective".
Even without a mandate, you'd probably find that orgs wouldn't ally if it really wasn't in their best interests.
Would it be possible to code in a system for alliances? Org leaders can choose to join an alliance, than have stuff like Alliance Who, Alliance 'Ranks', etc? Keep all the current roleplay of the various orgs, but with the fluidity of a changing system of alliances. And you can log in and 'see' a bigger portion of the player base?
Comments
To say though, the blood sacrifice is probably being referred to necromantic blood sacrifices etc. However, there does exist blood sacrifices in nature in the form of giving back to the earth of the animals being sacrificed-in a sacred ritual fashion. I believe White Hart is an example of life and death cycles. (I don't remember exactly) but from the resources and bits of lore I learned as a Serenwilder, it further reiterates the differences between blood sacrifices as one is natural and the other is perverse and goes against nature and life. So in essence, I can see and understand what is the neutral line without the crossing over into the other end of blood sacrifices.
<a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.lusternia.com/banner/minkahmet.jpg">https://www.lusternia.com/banner/minkahmet.jpg</a>- The forests follow the line that Maeve is redirecting their power to make them stronger than any of them would be individually, elevating themselves up with the aim of spreading beyond the forests and connecting to all the natural places of all worlds. The ascendancy of the forests in this way would in turn provide a catalyst for the cities to respond to.
- Merge Celest and Hallifax together as a "Dynara" focused org, you can play with the concepts of faith and science within the org. Order and Creation. Sainthood, ascension, extratemporal states, etc all being methods to defy destruction and gain eternal life.
- Combine Gaudiguch and Magnagora as a "Magnora" focused org, wheeling and dealing with entities that would consume you if you took a step wrong, the forces of Chaos and Destruction. They'd bargain become heralds if they could for the power and glory it'd bring them.
They're not perfect, cause nothing ever would be in this theoretical situation, but it would ideally align the orgs along three thematic lines.
If the game ever expanded options you'd also be able to do stuff like Magmamancers, Horror guardians that merge Nil with the Vortex, maybe guardians that create light-crystal constructs.
Either way, I definitely like the above theory about Celest/Halli, Mag/Gaudi, Seren/Glom.
Where I guess, necromantic style is potentially more on the lines of killing someone to harvest their power?
I am not sure if it is still the case in Game Design, but, for ages, DoAC was pointed to as why 3 orgs were better than two sides.
From a PVP standpoint, I'd be content with it literally being a free-for-all. 1v1v1 would just introduce a wildcard factor that x org can jump in and attack the other two while they're fighting, or any number of possible interceptions.
Granted, I'm still perfectly cool with the idea of all orgs go poof, everyone's forced to go and build something new which could also turn into a 1v1v1 anyway. The idea is, we have too many orgs.
For example, incentivise winning to the point that you see behaviours such as Org A pulls ahead in a fight so Org B starts focusing them but Org C quietly starts going for the objective and takes the win from the other two, which then makes A and B want to hit C next time. Figure out something so that B didn't say "well C is our allies so we'll hit A hard so C can get the objective".
Even without a mandate, you'd probably find that orgs wouldn't ally if it really wasn't in their best interests.