Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 6.2K All Categories
- 3.1K Everything Achaea
- 1.5K North of Thera
- 26 Archives of the Terraformer
- 257 The Matsuhama Arena
- 885 The Golden Dais of Creation
- 299 The Scarlattan Theatre
- 149 The Blank Canvas
- 2K Getting Help
- 412 General Questions
- 258 Quick Class Questions
- 1.3K Tech Support
- 313 Client Help
- 486 Curing Systems and Scripts
- 841 Off-Topic
- 255 The Wander Inn
- 586 The Universal Membrane
- 298 Class Discussions
- 298 Individual Class Sections
- 20 Alchemist
- 9 Apostate
- 30 Blademaster
- 9 Depthswalker
- 14 Druid
- 4 Infernal
- 20 Jester
- 19 Magi
- 34 Monk
- 11 Occultist
- 8 Paladin
- 7 Priest
- 29 Runewarden
- 18 Sentinel
- 26 Serpent
- 20 Shaman
- 9 Sylvan
Answers
1) "The Bloodsworn do not operate on a practical application of absolutism"
I am not Deucalion or Aurora, so I cannot authentically say "why" they created the Diaspora, nor can any non-divine on this forum. However, assuming we accept your condition that the the Bloodsworn Gods made the Diaspora to OOC appease Cyrene Devotionists players, then we can say this: "The Bloodsworn Gods are absolute except when there are dangerously negative real-world consequences." The most prominent way equally blessing Eleusians and Targossians would create real-world problems would be by creating combat imbalances, which could still be worked out through a variety of means. However, these IRL impacts are in NO way comparable to alienating an entire playerbase, as was the risk in Cyrene. Furthermore, the Bloodsworn Gods/Triumverate have always been absolute regarding blessing conditions, and my ruleset supports that.
2) "Blessings are a factional advantage and should be treated as such."
I agree. That is why my original plan actively prevents factions enemied with Targossas from receiving any blessing effectiveness, with the added option to allow the Bloodsworn Gods to "cut off" Cyrene and Eleusis if their priorities change. If the Mhaldorians/Ashtani/Hashani unanimously feel that Cyrene and Eleusis are too game-breakingly powerful because of the 66% blessings, then the @Tecton team will examine it and potentially change it. However, this is not as likely to happen as damage reduction mechanics have been overhauled (from additively to multiplicatively) since the original Shallamese outcry. In the event that it is a problem still, the @Tecton team will take a look at it and possibly change it then. Still, in the lore, it is the same blessing, and should be treated as close to that as possible unless it infringes on game balance.
3) "If it's all the same blessing, why would Devotionists obtain a greater benefit from them?"
I don't understand your question very well, so I'm going to answer multiple interpretations of it:
a) "Right now, Devotionists obtain a greater benefit from blessings than others do."
In Targossas, Blademasters and Monks receive the same 66% blessing that a Paladin does. Blademasters and Monks are not Devotionists. In Cyrene, Paladins currently gain a whopping 0% blessing bonus, just like most other Cyrenians. In this interpretation, this question makes little sense: Paladins are the only other non-priest devotionist, and they get exactly the same blessing that a non-devotionist of their city would get.
b) "Why do Priests gain a larger benefit?"
Game balance and IRE's credibility. Priests cough up the credits for their Healing skills and always having available blessings has been worked into their class design and overall balance. They can give them out to other people with a substantially weaker effect, making it a valuable support skill while retaining its class-specific value. Cutting a credit-buying, lesson-earning Priest's shields down to 66% when he has not violated any rules (remember: obeying the Diaspora gives him permission to live outside of Targossas) is 1) poor game design and 2) borderline fraud, as a person who pays credits, even for an "RP-centric" class, expects that they will get the value they deserve from their class so long as they follow the established rules.
4) "Why can't this argument not be equally applied to how well you actively and influentially follow the Bloodsworn teachings?"
It could. In fact, I wrote a whole post earlier about the Bloodsworn Gods should straight-up release a statement like, "The only true Devotionists live in Targossas, the rest of you are second-class chaplains," then tack on these restrictions as proof of that. However, they have never said anything like that. Instead, these changes resulted from an old combat imbalance outcry by Shallam that was later ported to Targossas. My plan holds truer to the existing Achaean canon, and it perpetuates blessing trends that have extended from Shallam into Targossas. If the Bloodsworn Gods release a statement that there are, in fact, multiple tiers of blessing aptitude, and that the old precedents of "Blessable" vs. Unblessable" have been overturned, by all means I will support that decision. Until then, the existing lore will favor my equality-laced interpretation over a "Good" caste system.
5) Read Daeir's suggestion for a plausible canonical explanation.
I don't need to invent new canon when everything I need is right here. Thanks though.
Cheers yo.
If I wanted, really badly, to play a sylvan...
I'd join Eleusis.
[edit]
Houses have made everyone so damn spoiled. I truly miss when organizational membership actually mattered beyond which CT (read: chat room) you decided to join. (I don't see it this way, but this seems to be the attitude many people seem to have, albeit a bit exaggerated to convey the point).
Seems like IRE has been really active in encouraging this "lets make every city identical other than the arbitrary contents of its HELP <city> file" attitude, but I despise it, and I desperately hope I'm not the only one.
[edit again]
Blessings are "balanced" for priests, and priests alone, with the slight exception that they're a minor part of "factional balance" that exists to account for the fact that Targossas and Mhaldor are, by definition, permanently at war. Every other city has the factional benefit of being neutral at any time they choose. I think this is fine. I don't see people flipping shit about the Effigy of Victory, which is MASSIVELY more advantageous than blessings will ever be.
And honestly, even if it wasn't fine... get the hell over it already. It's an RPG, the factions do not have to be totally goddamn equal in every way.
Being good to people is not being Good. Guess what? Mhaldorians are good to one another. They can even be good to Targossians. It's common courtesy. But common courtesy is not Good, it's just nice.
Being nauseatingly polite does not change the fact that you're a Neutral in a Neutral city with Neutral politics. If you want to be capital-G Good, join the Diaspora or Targossas.
Agree with Daeir on Excommunication, though. Excommunication/Anathema aren't interesting RP mechanics anymore. Back when they just stopped Devotion/Essence regen, and you could still regain those things via Rites of Prayer and eating hearts, they were "RP" mechanics, because you could still play an excommunicated/anathema'ed character and roleplay it out. That's not the case anymore, though. These days, they're borderline OOC mechanics to keep facional classes out of the other factions by flat-out removing access to those skills. You simply cannot play this game without your skills and be effective at anything, so it's a matter of changing class or quit playing. If we're going to force class changes, then refunding full lessons for it is the least the game can do to be fair about it.
It's called asymmetrical warfare.
(Army): Aerek says, "We'll never overcome that group through conventional means."
(Army): Aerek says, "Target: Arador's connection."
(Army): Aerek says, "Everyone summon your pets."
(attempt #2)
E: And the point of the current system isn't "we want to be harsh but fair", the point is "if you are an active defender of Creation and Good, then you get the full benefit, otherwise you're just a polite dude in robes."
And no, the point as stated by many people is 'Keeping the wrong people from jacking the factional ability through alts and nonsense'. So if you're just going to be unhelpful, go away.
You're suggesting we change things to make it more inclusive to people who don't actually have a mandate to defend Creation/Good, for example, all Paladins/Priests regardless of city affiliation.
One quick thing I want to add, I pointed out it's bottom's up, but I would argue that the priests just get the excommed penalty of 66% and not the enemied penalty. That'd be the one difference and that's just because... they already lose two skillsets on excomm, getting the third one nerfed is bad enough without losing it, too. No point and kicking the dead horse.
See, if you were all like @Ernam, we'd have been done here like three pages ago!
No. Why?
Because in the end, you are making an informed, voluntary decision to get excommunicated. I get the impression that you are talking about it as if I'm just waiting for someone to not capitalize Aurora's name in speech to hit the excom button - this could not be farther from the truth. Like Daeir, I personally would rather not force someone to potentially waste OOC investment in their character, because fuck that. I want to make this game fun for people, and recalling one or more of your skills doesn't make it more fun for anyone.
You pretty much have to make a conscious decision to get excommunicated. If you don't want it to happen, it is -incredibly- easy to avoid. The expectations for the Diaspora are next to nothing, and I'm not sure if I'm even allowed to make it any more difficult than it currently is. The only circumstances I can foresee actually using Excom are on (a) novices being morons, which at level 35 isn't going to set them back in lessons or (b) people who are purposefully going for Excom as an RP device. For those people, there is no viable reason they should get to hold on to their priestly skills at all, imho.
tl;dr if you get excom'd, you are probably trying to get excom'd. also crai moar if you are excom'd.
I've seen some of the "You're about to get excommed" conversations, and it's definitely true that (at least in the ones I saw) every attempt was made to figure something out that didn't involve excommunication. Personally, I think it was too lenient - but even I don't think it's necessary unless you're pretty much actively anti-Good or very openly and consistently breaking the very few rules (raiding Targossas, Defiling Bloodsworn shrines, bashing innocents, basically).
@Aodfionn is totally right. If you get excommed, you knew you were doing something that would result in it, usually repeatedly, and did it anyways. Your fault, not IREs, or Targossas'.
Artemis says, "You are so high maintenance, Tharvis, gosh."
Tecton says, "It's still your fault, Tharvis."
GG