|
Post by Iceshard on Oct 22, 2008 10:35:41 GMT -5
Well between Zeals idea for his new guild and the thieves guild den being put into the server this coming patch (last I heard) Two new guilds will be emerging. Though I havent been in the server recently, for those who have encountered Hakeem, he leaves many windows for RP open as well as quests. -Ice
|
|
|
Post by Jadeite Feyern on Oct 22, 2008 12:31:26 GMT -5
Oh ok. Good to know I was imagining things. Smiles can something hide different intent so I was getting some strange signals from your text. Thanks for clarifying. Don't worry If I wish to stand against the guild I'll create a char(*) for that and do it good old RP way, not get personally engaged in that as a player. This is a light thread so we can have some fun. I didn't go in-game and shoot 20 fireballs on your head did it? ;D As tempting as it is I'll stick to posts which only purpose is a laugh. Weave Masters without Nahum... (*) I do however have an idea for Nahum's total opposition
|
|
davidb
Senior Member
Posts: 300
|
Post by davidb on Oct 23, 2008 4:53:02 GMT -5
Well, there's nothing wrong with people aligning themselves into whatever group they want to, however I don't feel appeal to join a group that is so "inclusive", I mean, it practically takes anyone. Wizards, Paladins, Rangers, you name it.
Wizards usually belong to wizard-only groups in most literature and settings. Why? because their interests as spellcasters are often very different from other groups. They want arcane research, time and resources for their work, etc. From a RP perspective, I think most wizards are people devoted to themselves, not to humanity, or religion, or ideologies. Of course I'm generalizing here, exceptions are always there, but I just can't see wizards as defenders of the Good, actually Elminster is an oddity, just like Gandalf was before him.
On the other hand, there's the religious kind here. Paladins, clerics, I can't see them joining an order outside their cults, unless it's temporal/circumstantial. If your god is everything for your character, then it is everything, period. Very religious people, that has dedicated their lives to a deity, and usually spends most time praying, meditating, and attending cults, will rarely like the idea of spending all their time and goals with people not religious, or adoring other deities. Yes, it may happen. But no, it's not a natural thing and must be RPed properly.
|
|
|
Post by DM Cephas on Oct 23, 2008 12:50:10 GMT -5
Well, there's nothing wrong with people aligning themselves into whatever group they want to, however I don't feel appeal to join a group that is so "inclusive", I mean, it practically takes anyone. Wizards, Paladins, Rangers, you name it. Wizards usually belong to wizard-only groups in most literature and settings. Why? because their interests as spellcasters are often very different from other groups. They want arcane research, time and resources for their work, etc. From a RP perspective, I think most wizards are people devoted to themselves, not to humanity, or religion, or ideologies. Of course I'm generalizing here, exceptions are always there, but I just can't see wizards as defenders of the Good, actually Elminster is an oddity, just like Gandalf was before him. On the other hand, there's the religious kind here. Paladins, clerics, I can't see them joining an order outside their cults, unless it's temporal/circumstantial. If your god is everything for your character, then it is everything, period. Very religious people, that has dedicated their lives to a deity, and usually spends most time praying, meditating, and attending cults, will rarely like the idea of spending all their time and goals with people not religious, or adoring other deities. Yes, it may happen. But no, it's not a natural thing and must be RPed properly. Too inclusive? I may have to disagree to a point although I do understand what you are saying. The exclusivity is in the purpose of the guild. Not all PC's role play will fit in it. I've actually discouraged some from joining because it didn't make a sense for them to. I've also resisted recommendations to make divine "masters" because it was going too far. I can see clerics or paladins of Mystra joining us though. Although I did like the idea of the Weave Scouts, it was brought on as a request because the need was there. Rangers were running around that didn't worship Mielikki and wanted to join a group with purpose. Since the concept could still fit the guild's purpose, we went ahead and did so. Consider the Red Wizards for example. Don't they have Thayan Knights? As for wizards and "defenders of good", take the Red Wizards again as an example (I was actually kind of hoping that they were going to be our nemesis and built ourselves as an aler ego to them). They're not a regular "wizard guild" either. Although one of the emphases of the WM is to study the weave, it's also on the responsible use of it. We weren't/aren't built on the defenders of good concept but given our charge, we usually end up doing so. And given that Nahum is actually an Ilmatarii, he tends to have those leanings as well. And for wizards that are just concerned about learning, I definitely promote that if you look at our reputation system. BUT, do you actually think a player will log on as their PC and sit in the tower for the whole time they are logged on? I'll RP the fact that we do have wizards just studying in the tower and that is all they do, but I'd be foolish to think that would be fun for the average player. I hope I'm not sounding defensive nor am I trying to convince you to join us. I just wanted to clarify a few points that you brought up. The WM is doing well because there is a central theme to them, an infrastructure that works, and an awesome community of role-players that support each other. If you haven't noticed, I'm actually trying to build/support other communities/guilds to be successful. Anyway, I hope you find a guild to call your own
|
|
davidb
Senior Member
Posts: 300
|
Post by davidb on Oct 23, 2008 16:53:15 GMT -5
Hey theodaine, I was just saying why *I* don't feel appealed to join, or even more specifically, actually my current characters. Nothing wrong in the WM, not that I have anything to say about wrongness in the first place! And everytime I've met a Weave Master, I've met a good player and a good roleplayer, so please, I am not opposing or anything. However, as specific points have been mentioned, I will reply. The red wizards are a perfect example of what I said. They are devoted to themselves alone, they have no "evil agenda" to pursue, they're actually trying to gain power and nothing else, world domination is a mean, not an end... their true goal is ultimate arcane power And they have knights, but you got it right yourself, they *have* them, the knights are in no way part of the organization, just guild expendable goods. Wizards hire mercenaries or bodyguards, as meatshields, unless the exception you mention (Mystra Paladins). Example of inclusiveness... do you take Warlocks and Sorcerers in? Because they've nothing in common with wizard scholarship at all, and usually sorcerers are not in good terms with wizards, while warlocks, well, are even worse. WM is the more succesful player-made faction right now, you are correct in all your points! I hope it never sounded like I did not respect your work!
|
|
|
Post by DM Cephas on Oct 23, 2008 17:56:54 GMT -5
Hey theodaine, I was just saying why *I* don't feel appealed to join, or even more specifically, actually my current characters. Nothing wrong in the WM, not that I have anything to say about wrongness in the first place! And everytime I've met a Weave Master, I've met a good player and a good roleplayer, so please, I am not opposing or anything. However, as specific points have been mentioned, I will reply. The red wizards are a perfect example of what I said. They are devoted to themselves alone, they have no "evil agenda" to pursue, they're actually trying to gain power and nothing else, world domination is a mean, not an end... their true goal is ultimate arcane power And they have knights, but you got it right yourself, they *have* them, the knights are in no way part of the organization, just guild expendable goods. Wizards hire mercenaries or bodyguards, as meatshields, unless the exception you mention (Mystra Paladins). Example of inclusiveness... do you take Warlocks and Sorcerers in? Because they've nothing in common with wizard scholarship at all, and usually sorcerers are not in good terms with wizards, while warlocks, well, are even worse. Oh. I understood that you were just speaking for yourself. I was only clarifying. Thanks for clarifying your point as well though. I guess I may have sounded defensive even though I tried not to. (so much tone is lost on text) As for the Red Wizzies and their quest for total arcane power while using world domination as a mean. That's not an evil agenda? Maybe we have different points on it Thayan Knghts, Weave Guardians... pretty much the same IMO --- at least in intent (i.e. someone to protect the frail bodies of wizards. I didn't want every WM to feel like they needed to become a wizard in a tin can) I also set the Weave Guardians up this way cuz of the lack of economy. It's hard to "hire" someone without a steady income. Sorcerers are welcome but are at a natural disadvantage to advance unless they get scribe scroll feat. The other part of our purpose statement however is to protect and promote responsible use of the Weave so they fit right in. Warlocks however are not given membership because of where they get their power from (as noted in culture). PS: I appreciate your clarifications of not trying to be offensive. Too often, people continue to escalate tone until it becomes a flame war. good on ya.
|
|