Order Items/Artifacts

Vivet

Okay folks, this has run its course on Simple Ideas and is not longer a simple idea, but I think it's worth talking about it more and I want to address a few points myself. And it's certainly worth being its own thread, so here we are.

Now, let's look at guild beasts for a moment. You can keep them if you quit the guild, but they lose the special guild skills. There's not really meant to be any way to forcibly take back that beast from the person once they're out of the guild, and that seems to be the intent/design behind it. I think the lack of beast trading as an option is to help limit them being all over the place otherwise while still respecting the potential to invest in that beast if you really want to while in the guild.

With Orders and Order items/artifacts that are -purchased-, there seems to be a similar intent. If you're in the Order and take care of it, you keep it. But when you leave the Order? Well, it's obviously become a longstanding issue at this point, but the gods themselves haven't chosen to address it. It feels as though the intent is that you can keep it, particularly in lieu of Eventru's Order and what happened there with the stoles. The issue seems to be when people who have never been in the Order at all obtain said stuff. This stuff isn't always meant to be reserved for top tier Order members, after all - sometimes it's meant for any order member! Rilain (who sells Zvoltz' items) is right in the open section of the Temple. Anyone can walk right up to him - that anyone could also buy from him was probably an oversight, which is why the items were requested to be returned/refunded. Can't comment on the hydras.

If order members are buying stoles and then giving them away because they do not reset (can anyone confirm), then that honestly sounds like a bug to me.

Order Beasts are another issue. I do have a foreign order beast, which is collared, and I was actually quite surprised it could be transferred to me at all. Regardless of IC circumstance, I did take it up with OOC fore-knowledge that it could cause issue, and at the time actually didn't mind inviting that. I feel like having that as an avenue for RP can be interesting, but at the same time I see how some would find it overly jarring and irritating to deal with. In my case, it took RL months (3, 4?) for anyone in the relevant order to even notice, and it just kind of blew over from there in the aftermath.

For beasts in particular, I think it would be best for Orders to speak to their respective Divine and ensure they are expressly aware of all issues, then seek to fine-tune availability from there. Whether a Divine wants a beast to explode into ash when someone leaves the Order with it or not should be up to them first and foremost.

For stoles, I think they need to only be usable by the person who purchased them, and any caveats from there are up to the divine as well. I think @Lavinya's idea of having them change into something different for Order deserters even sounds rather interesting! I can imagine Fain stoles (assuming if there are any - if not, then in the future) changing to always being an overgrown maggot with the face of the wearer clearly displayed - it could be fun to keep/play with that, even if it doesn't fulfill it's hiding function!

And as a final note, just for @Xenthos, I've actually been toying with customised beast ideas off and on, but haven't really pursued them due to laziness/lack of intense interest. I'd figured the issue was mostly blown over, but if you're only avoiding it because of the collar and prefer to see some other resolution, then I can always see about sitting down and actually getting something new written up, then having some special event prepared to transfer the customisation. I understand that for a lot of people, this would be bothersome and costly to go through with, but for me the expense really isn't an issue at all.

And that's about all I've to say on the subject, else conversation can continue here and/or posts can be transferred to unclutter Simple Ideas if necessary.

Lerad

This is one of those things that certainly can be on a case-by-case basis. Without explicit instructions from the God, though, it should be safe to assume that normal protocols, like enemying, ganking or other standard IC repercussions until demands are met (specifically the death of the beast, or the tradein/return of the stole) are applicable. After all, Order items and Order beasts are... Order specific. If a player wants to take them out of that Order, that's their prerogative... and so is any response by the Order members the prerogative of those members.

I don't really think there IS a need to hard code things, but hey, if people want that done to save themselves (and others) the trouble, fine by me. Stoles in particular are irritating anyway (full disclaimer: I don't have a stole, that's why I'm hatin' on em). They don't have enough of a strategical application to make any difference in a fight. No one's ever escaped from me due to a stole - if they didn't die, they would not have died anyway, stole or no stole. And I've never had problems targeting the right people in a fight, stole or no stole. All they do is make it difficult to figure out who's talking when RPing. I wouldn't mind if they hardcoded a restriction that only the buyer can use them. I would love it even more if they hardcoded a restriction so that even the buyer can't use them: ie, delete them from existence.

Beasts are a different matter, though. Those have a combat application, and some of them are given really cool inherents that make it awesome for the Order members. Like a badge of honour. Taking them out of the Order and trotting them around is nothing less than a direct middle finger to the remaining people in the Order. Which is fine, of course, as long as the Order can make a fuss about it. As they should. If you want to hardcode it so that it's not possible (they poof into ash, as Vivet says) then that's perfectly fine too, given the importance some of those beasts are to the RP of the Order on top of being a badge of honour.

Shaddus

My two cents is this:

Order items shouldn't be able to be bought by non-order people, or purchased as gifts. Period.

Stoles should stop working if you quit the order. They're supposed to represent some facet/tenet of your god, and you've given that up. Special case by case basis if the god gets eaten or fusion-ha's.

Beasts are a little more ambiguous to me. I mean, yes. They're part of the order, and they sort of symbolise your deity. But they're also something you're putting work into, perhaps collaring, and so on. Maybe instead of being a customised beast with all of those amazing appearances (I'm looking at you, hydras), they're given a base appearance if you leave the order. Something dull, brown, and unappealing. They should lose all inherents and just be a basic ride.

Qistrel

The problem with hard-limiting beasts and stoles is situations where an order dissolves, like if the god dies, fuses or moves to another org for some reason. Should all the really cool Eventru serpents turn into little grey worms because He's gone?

Shaddus

Well, no. But that should be handled on a case by case basis, as opposed to someone just leaving the order.

Elanorwen

My 2 cents here:

Items like those tend to cost dingbats, an OOC-ish currency. More often than not, people will be getting dingbats from other players that got theirs via IRE Elite/wheel spins/promotion of some sort. If they're going to be exploding then refunds should be given. As far as I am aware, stoles don't work for non-order members, specifically, you can't use them to speak/emote if it's not yours. If they are also not resetting back to the original owner, then that's a problem that will need to be addressed via either a bug report or the owner issuing him/herself as they are artifact items that should return to owner. That is also why buying them as gifts works.

As far as the specific issue with the worg I took from the order... when I left, I spoke with Shikari that I was leaving. If he had said, return the worg to the pack as it is meant to be, I would have. He didn't. At that point, the worg should be considered my property to do with as I will. Mortals wanting to take the matter into their own hands are only trying to claim that their Divine isn't doing his job in the matter, and that will be Elanorwen's IC stance on the situation if addressed.

If an order beast isn't supposed to be transferable, then the ability already exists to make them impossible to transfer in much the same way custom pets/mage/druid beasts already cannot be transferred. Making them lose their innates is an entirely different beast. The innates, in the case of mage and druid beasts, are linked to the respective skill in *mancy/druidry. There is no special skill that one receives when in the order that they would lose on quitting to make this work. Of course, if people believe that coding time should be dedicated to that particular endeavour, I guess it can be done, too... like a 'beast trainer' order privilege or whatever. I guess that would also be a way to limit lower-ranked order members from using the order beasts, too.

Synkarin

Man what, just because something costs 25 dingbats doesn't mean you should get a refund because you left the order.

You weren't forced out, you weren't kicked out, it's like me wanting my essence refunded for leaving a cult. I can make 25 dingbats in game in less than a week if I put my mind to it without any real effort. Lets be reasonable here.

As far as IC stuff, I don't see anything wrong with members of an Order hunting down people with order beast/stoles whatever. It's the same with skills, why not that stuff. 

Eritheyl

When a stole is worn by someone other than the owner, it only gives the changed room appearance - talking and emoting through the stoles is disabled. I agree that stoles should 1) reset to their owner, provided current circumstances are not due to a bug, and 2) not work for those not in the Order, either in line with the current 'not held by owner' restrictions, or at all.

Also imo, Order beasts should not be transferable, ever. As for what happens to said beast if its owner leaves the Order, I'd say that's really not our business to dictate*. Now if the God in question were to swoop down from the Havens and carry it away, that'd be fine by me - but it really gets hairy when you take credit investments into account.

* hunting down and killing them aside, do support this

Maligorn

Order beasts should be transferable between two members of the same Order, I think.

But if Order beasts were treated like all the -mancy and Druidry special mounts, I think a lot of this would be a null problem. Agree with Eritheyl on order stoles.

Aerotan

Y'know, I hate to take this stance, but there's a HUGELONG disclaimer at the bottom of the page you order/confirm credit/dingbat/lesson/artifact purchases on that says, in a TL;DR version:

We are not responsible for what you spend these on. If the value of the thing changes in-game, that does not negate that you, at this point in time, decided that it was worth spending this money to obtain it.

Admin aren't necessarily responsible for giving you a refund because the orgbeast shouldn't have been purchasable/transferable in the first place. If the admin decide to take the stance that only order members should have access to an order item, they are entirely within their rights to take actions in that direction without a refund. Good customer service suggests that they offer at least a token recompensation for it, but that's it. Certainly situations like Vivet's, where they purchased another artifact to cover the beast should be taken seriously, but as exceptions, not as a general rule.

And honestly, my suggestion as far as having purchased a collar for a beast that's no longer allowed would be to offer a refund on the collar but not the beast.

Elanorwen

Aerotan said:

Y'know, I hate to take this stance, but there's a HUGELONG disclaimer at the bottom of the page you order/confirm credit/dingbat/lesson/artifact purchases on that says, in a TL;DR version:

We are not responsible for what you spend these on. If the value of the thing changes in-game, that does not negate that you, at this point in time, decided that it was worth spending this money to obtain it.

Admin aren't necessarily responsible for giving you a refund because the orgbeast shouldn't have been purchasable/transferable in the first place. If the admin decide to take the stance that only order members should have access to an order item, they are entirely within their rights to take actions in that direction without a refund. Good customer service suggests that they offer at least a token recompensation for it, but that's it. Certainly situations like Vivet's, where they purchased another artifact to cover the beast should be taken seriously, but as exceptions, not as a general rule.

And honestly, my suggestion as far as having purchased a collar for a beast that's no longer allowed would be to offer a refund on the collar but not the beast.

Retroactive application of new rules doesn't fly. Next thing you know, there'll be retroactive application of "Hey, this artifact now costs double. Insert 2000 credits to continue using".

EDIT: Additionally, the rule you're quoting doesn't apply. It applies only if an artifact's cost changes and people decide to ask for a refund for that artifact they bought for 200 credits (example) that now costs 100 credits (example). It doesn't apply to any situation where the artifact is no longer available. As it stands, overhaul will reduce the amount of vials/pipes that people will need to use by a pretty decent amount. It has been stated that refunds for extra ones will be offered when the process is complete.

Rialorm

Aerotan said:

And honestly, my suggestion as far as having purchased a collar for a beast that's no longer allowed would be to offer a refund on the collar but not the beast.

Since the collar is a pretty big investment, I'd say you shouldn't just lose that. What I'd suggest is that you get your collar back when the beast goes poof. You either get to put it on another beast, or trade it in.

Also I am totally jealous of you people with stoles and beasts.

Lerad

What? Yeah, Sidd is right. Dingbats are no excuse for anything. Credits are also an OOC currency. I spent credits on my skills, and I quit Glom to join Mag, I should get full use of my Nekotai skills, or a 100% refund. Yes?

No. 

If I quit, I lose access to power because ICly, the Nekotai require a connection to the Master Ravenwood for power. If I forget my skills, I get only a 50% return on lessons. I might have spent a million dollars and my first born on those credits, and those consequences won't change - whether I was kicked out or whether I wanted a change of pace. You might have spend dingbats on your beast, and the consequences of taking the worg out of the Order in defiance of the IG lore, circumstances etc won't change either, whether you were kicked out or not. You can use it as a point of conflict, but to insist that you get refunded? That's just ridiculous.

Shikari didn't say anything likely because he didn't think of saying anything. He's less a customs officer checking for contrabrand and more a volunteer admin that's RPing with you. That doesn't mean you get carte blanche to ignore consequences. Great, so he forgot to mention the worg. Now no one is allowed to punish (strong word I'm using here, yes) you for taking it away? What, are we playing a game of spot the difference? You have five minutes to see if I'm taking anything out that I'm not supposed to. Five minutes are over, your chance has passed. Anything I took that you didn't spot now "should be considered my property to do with as I will". Yes?

No.

Aerotan

I'm not Sidd..? Or did he post and I missed it?

Lerad

I was referring to Synkarin. (Yes, he posted.)

Aerotan

Didn't know Sidd was Synkarin. Thanks