Trimming down guilds/orgs

Pejat · November 2015

Would you be good with the Divine trimming off a guild or org that you personally spent years of your life investing in?

Synkarin · November 2015

Yes, I think it'd be great

Zac · November 2015

Pejat said:

Would you be good with the Divine trimming off a guild or org that you personally spent years of your life investing in?

Isn't this a bit biased of a prompt? You're skewing the results with a question based more on emotional appeal.

More to the point, I love the Nekotai and I enjoy the roleplay and the tasks that are required to gain rank. It gives me another thing to work on when I get bored from the other things. But if the admin decided to get rid of them and just let us have whatever skills we wanted, I'd be alright. I would prefer other methods, but you're going to have to get pretty appeal-to-extremes and straw-man-y to make me be like "Nah".

You're asking "Would you be good with" and not "Do you want". But, once again, not a very good prompt for a question, in my opinion.

Talan · November 2015

Yeah, just to clarify... I wouldn't actively oppose this if Estarra decides it's what needs to happen, but I would be sad to see institutions like the ur'Guard or the Shadowdancers cease to be. I understand that the loss would not be felt equally in all guilds.

Ayisdra · November 2015

At one end, I kinda feel like some guilds (like warriors and monks) could be one guild with 'warriors' and 'monks' being different paths within the same guild. And perhaps mages/guardians (or druids/wiccan) as one guild too. With an uneven number of archetypes at this time, bards have that awkward spot that they might not fit nicely with easily of these two groups.

And the other end, it doesn't solve the issue of lack of people with those skills. Sure a guild will probably look more full, but going with that logic, why not just delete all guilds and tie skills to cities/communes.

Pejat · November 2015

@Zac I hear many people talk about wanting to trim down orgs and guilds, but I imagine most are thinking it will happen to some other org/guild, and all their own hard work will be safe. I do believe it would healthy for the game, but at the same time it could drive away people who have given life to those guilds/without anyone's notice.

The emotional appeal is trying to remind people that these places were built up by the hard work of dedicated people. We could end up losing a lot more than just those orgs/guilds. So we need to ask, 'Is it worth it?'

Zac · November 2015

Pejat said:

@Zac I hear many people talk about wanting to trim down orgs and guilds, but I imagine most are thinking it will happen to some other org/guild, and all their own hard work will be safe. I do believe it would healthy for the game, but at the same time it could drive away people who have given life to those guilds/without anyone's notice.

The emotional appeal is trying to remind people that these places were built up by the hard work of dedicated people. We could end up losing a lot more than just those orgs/guilds. So we need to ask, 'Is it worth it?'

If you intended to phrase it that way, that's cool! I find polls based around emotional appeal serve more purpose in trying to whip people into a frenzy rather than having them think about it.

I can totally dig where you're coming from. There's some IRE guilds I've helped built up which, if I heard were deleted, would be a bit disappointed but also be fine with and understand. What used to be fine and work before may not any longer, etc.

Zeleni · November 2015

I've seen guilds in Aetolia be merged (Daru+Luminaries=Illuminai), completely changed (Druids->Shamans), and deleted altogether (Atabahi/Bahkatu). I believe all of these changes have been for the best, especially when guilds are merged or destroyed; there were just TOO MANY, and I believe that Lusternia is even worse off in that regard. If the population isn't large enough to host 28 guilds, then something needs to be done about it. What is the best route? That, I don't know.

Lerad · November 2015

Yes, much as I love the flavour of each and every Guild in the game right now (and yes, every one of them takes up a specific role and niche of their own) there just isn't enough population to support so many Guilds. In the Nekotai, although we've always been a tiny group, we've had the fortune of always having enough leaders. There are Guilds which have had periods that do not. Of course, there are periods in the Nekotai where there're only the leaders, which, I suppose, might be a better situation than having not enough leaders and leaving newbies hanging.

Some might argue this is the fault of the players, and perhaps in no small part it is. However, it is not a phenomenon isolated to a single Guild, (though some might have to struggle with such periods more often than others) nor is there a Guild that has never been touched by such a phenomenon before.

I rather admire and like the triumvirate system of Lusternian Guilds, it makes it really seem like there is a cadre of leaders you can rely on, and a space you can step up to help as a newbie if one of them goes inactive or steps down - or even if they don't, as a newish player, you can challenge a specific position with the argument that you can do a better job at that specific aspect, rather than having to fight with the one single leader on a holistic merit of your entire existence. However, when you multiply that by every single Guild, it becomes a huge glut of positions just waiting to be filled - and leaving them unfilled can make a Guild seem more empty than it actually is, or put undue pressure on players who don't want such a position to fill it by virtue of having such a position.

Merging certain guilds together to SHARE the same leadership without diluting their niche and role in the lore is possible, I feel. Even if you want to continue to have barriers of classflexing between classes even when they are under the same leadership, that is fine. The important part is consolidating that leadership, and the people who depend on that leadership. The exact mechanics can be hashed out slowly etc (maybe even after the overhaul) but I think it's definitely well worth considering.

Ayisdra · November 2015

Zeleni said:

I've seen guilds in Aetolia be merged (Daru+Luminaries=Illuminai), completely changed (Druids->Shamans), and deleted altogether (Atabahi/Bahkatu). I believe all of these changes have been for the best, especially when guilds are merged or destroyed; there were just TOO MANY, and I believe that Lusternia is even worse off in that regard. If the population isn't large enough to host 28 guilds, then something needs to be done about it. What is the best route? That, I don't know.

Yeah. we still have at least 2 more monk guilds. Given that there is still another archetype that hasn't been released yet, I don't think we could support another 6 guilds on top of that (not to mention the opening of more orgs like Ackleberry )

Kiradawea · November 2015

Zeleni said:

I've seen guilds in Aetolia be merged (Daru+Luminaries=Illuminai), completely changed (Druids->Shamans), and deleted altogether (Atabahi/Bahkatu). I believe all of these changes have been for the best, especially when guilds are merged or destroyed; there were just TOO MANY, and I believe that Lusternia is even worse off in that regard. If the population isn't large enough to host 28 guilds, then something needs to be done about it. What is the best route? That, I don't know.

And yet, with no werewolves or werebears, why bother play Aetolia?

Actually, why bother play any MUD but Lusternia. The Institute is by far the most enjoyable guild in any IRE I've been part of.

Lerad · November 2015

They still have werewolves and werebears there. Also werealligators too, iirc. It has become a guildless class for everyone to choose (given out by an NPC), or something like that.

Kiradawea · November 2015

Huh. Cool.

Honestly, as far as guilds go, those two guilds really were directionless and purposeless. So I can sort of understand them getting removed.

At the same time, I'm not a fan of guilds being removed, and definitely not orgs being removed. If there was no Hallifax in Lusternia, I wouldn't be playing Lusternia at all.

Daraius · November 2015

This basically happened to me in Achaea, and was a big part of the reason I left. When class restrictions were imposed on Houses, mine was suddenly made into something much different from the org I'd spent years cultivating and supporting, without any input from me, nor any real lore-based explanation for me to give my Housemates. So from that perspective I'd vote no. It sucked for me, and judging by the changes to Houses that came later, probably wasn't the right decision for the game either. Lusternia's a different animal, of course. I doubt I'd keep playing if Hallifax was nuked altogether, but I can imagine a scenario where a carefully considered, lore-supported shaving down or consolidation of guilds could be palatable.

Sylandra · November 2015

Iunno. I would have to see how the change was implemented.

I'm not going to assume I have any grand idea of what the Design(tm) would look like with guilds changed, but I would hate to see a sloppily executed quick-fix without careful thought being put into the new implementation. A big change deserves big deliberation and planning. One thing that I like about Lusternia is that it's got at its core a really strong idea of what its lore and outlook ought to be. I wouldn't want to lose that sense of purpose in the potential version 2.0 of guilds.

Shuyin · November 2015

Well this is a pretty loaded question, why not ask, "Are you guys willing to do what it takes to attract new players, trim down the fat, and consolidate positions in a dwindling playerbase?"

Honestly, what kind of rationale can the "keep guilds" side have for keeping all 28 guilds + whatever number for the classes that get released maybe someday in the future? Using a very conservative estimate of needing at least 3 (GC, GM, GA) per guild, you'd need 84 people playing. It is currently 6 PM PST and there are 50 players around. I'm not convinced that number will increase by a huge amount if it were a weekend.

It's not happening.

Granted, I don't think we should delete orgs (too late for that), but we really, really, really should think about deleting/consolidating guilds.

Everything in Lusternia is already built around org identity, this is supported by affinity, the rewards for conflict systems, the power system, and many more. Guilds are mechanically unnecessary.

Rivius · November 2015

But some guilds have been around for a long time and successfully built a strong identity. You can't just discount that.

Havastus · November 2015

Here's the real question: were you to remove guilds, what would you have in their place?

Seems to me that the only thing you COULD remove are the guilds. Cities and communes are too heavily invested in to get rid of, in my opinion.

Shuyin · November 2015

Absolutely not, but I think there is plenty of leeway (both mechanically and RP...ly) to delete guilds while still maintaining guild identity one way or another.

The laziest and simplest version of it is a clan, for example.

New Guild X can probably incorporate many ideas of the old guild(s) by using some parts of the GH, lore, etc. on top of that, if not more. The only request that I can make is to not half-ass it like the family system, classflexing, guild bonding, totems, and so on.

Achaea had an entire overarching year end storyline built in for the deletion/change of classes/cities/etc. I'm sure Lusternia can easily create an event that matches, if not surpasses, that.

Shuyin · November 2015

RE: guild replacement suggestion - this has been discussed in many other threads, but you can make mini-societies within an org centered around some ideal that doesn't necessarily require a specific class.

Example:

Serenwilde can have 3...factions (?):

-Rah we hate cities/protect nature/fight enemies combat society

-Woo we like being naked and do rituals/blah RP society

-Yeah we love reading about Moon and Stag scholarly society

You can also be boring and split things down the middle: One faction centered on Hart Stuff, one centered around Moon Stuff.

I'm sure the players can/should be given a lot of reign to decide how they want to split things.

Xeria · November 2015

my character's identity is built around the shofangi, even if she is no longer part of the guild. if they took it away, i would have to start over as a new character.

Sylandra · November 2015

For clarification, I'm not against re-imagining guilds. The guild bloat is real. I would just be curious to see how a rework was framed. Certainly there has to be a sensible compromise, somewhere. I do think there is a potential roleplay route available for everyone who says "my character is based on X" with the consolidating or deleting of guilds, because I would expect Lusternia to address those roleplay concerns as much as the mechanical ones. Orgs influence our roleplay, not necessarily define it.

Example: if Hallifax blows up, the character of Sylandra doesn't stop existing. She simply becomes a character who has to react to Hallifax blowing up, and chooses a new place to relocate and adjust in the wake of those changes. The question really is if I, the player, would be able to sustain interest in those changes. And that's an extreme example of what we are discussing here; no one is asking to blow up a city or commune, from what I can tell. Guilds I feel are on a much smaller scale, and I imagine there could be a way to explain away an adjustment. Could just need a compelling story to make the mechanics feasible.

Xenthos · November 2015

PS: Different phrasing and / or a better plan would affect my vote. I've discussed potential for merging / coming up with some ways to deal with too many guilds and spread, and supported other ideas. However, the way this specifically is presented is Not Okay with me.

Portius · November 2015

The ideas in past threads about more flexible organizations based on ideology that can change based on player interest and are distinct from skillsets appeal to me. I would like the increased flexibility and not needing to worry as much about advancement and whatnot.

Just nuking a few guilds without changing the system for them does not appeal to me, except maybe for a few guilds that I personally dislike. There's a couple of mergers I wouldn't object to, but not very many.

Shuyin · November 2015

AKA the half-assed solution

Sylandra · November 2015

Three factions seems doable. Three is a good number. I feel it's generally about two guilds that are ghost towns in an org anyhow.

Kaalak · November 2015

To an extent the question of consolidation of guilds misses the point. The playerbase is shrinking. Remove the individuals who make players quit. By any means necessary.

Ayisdra · November 2015

Kaalak said:

To an extent the question of consolidation of guilds misses the point. The playerbase is shrinking. Remove the individuals who make players quit. By any means necessary.

Sometimes this isn't the best solution. Sometimes people quit because of things the admin do (either IC as gods or the choices they make OOCly as admin of the game). I'm fairly sure we have lost a number of people because of the overhaul (the simplifying of afflictions, etc). And the same time, I'm sure we have kept/gained people because of it.

Sylandra · November 2015

Even if we agree that there are toxic individuals who are allegedly driving droves of players away, I do think we have to address the elephant in the room here, which is that text games are a rather niche gaming community to begin with. That population starts out small. Achaea is big because it has been around forever. Aetolia had the advantage of the vampire interest boom. In general though, we're not World of Warcraft and we're never going to be. That's fine. I think Shuyin's point is to model Lusternia to best suit the audience that it currently has, and that's frankly not a bad suggestion.

Tarkenton · November 2015

I'm all for guilds getting a trim. Physical, Mental/Spritual, Musical. A lot of the monks would be easy to fold into their warrior counterparts due to "oh, hey, yeah, our job is to be the front line/guardians of X too!". Wiccan/Guardian and Druid/Mage? Bit tougher, sure, since it's either cosmic/elemental combo or spirit/spirit combo, but hey, can make these things work. Obviously things would have to be much more well thought out than just reducing the number of guilds to three. And bards being lumped off by themselves? Kinda lame, tbh. Hence a more "factions" style system within orgs, the ideal would letting it have a more organic feeling. Glom is the best example I can come up with, because hey, I'm in Glom. Night Faction, Crow Faction, and for the sake of this argument, Guardian Faction. Night venerates Night and advances her agenda, same with Crow, and Guardian faction could care less about the fluff, they just wanna keep Glom pure/safe/whatever. Time goes by, people start drifting from the Guardian Faction. Then they're like "Hey, you know what, we want a voice of Mahalla Faction!" and so with a minimum number of players (something like 4-6?) a new faction can be born. Factions die out if they drop below a specific level of activity for a set period of time. Allows players to constantly work to shape the political landscape of their orgs, while having the base foundation that the admins put in place likely staying. Could go so far as to say that each faction gets a GM/GA/GC equivalent, if you want to carry that on, or at the very least the GM/Faction head equivalent. Dunno, pen and napkin level of brain storm at this point.

Saran · November 2015

I've been saying yes to deleting guilds for a while now so probably no surprises with my vote.

I suppose one of the things that I look at is Achaea, they've been trimming down, pulling their numbers in line, and even with their playerbase they're only aiming to have what... half the guilds we do?

Yeah, losing guilds will be sucky, let's not sugar coat it. There are some guilds which will probably just be lost and that aspect of the game may never resurface, while others may be rebuilt in whatever system we progress into.

This is why I really like the concept of flexible factions, guilds are already pretty heavily player directed even though the... seed is planted by the admin (too naturey?) and I think that putting the power in the hands of the players means that we'd see factions based on what is interesting to the various player groups, all subject to the same level of admin approval that say... a historic house would go through to become a thing.

If Serenwilde gets enough support for Moon and Stag factions then that would probably happen, if someone then decides... "screw this, everyone's being a bunch of cityhugging wimps. Full barbarian mode GO! Farella is my hero" then that should be a thing they can do provided that they can prove it would be a valuable addition to the game and that they have enough players supporting that rp. In this way, factions should grow as the playerbase grows.

On the flipside, if there was a... "We love the outsiders faction, Rhoswen 4 prez" in Serenwilde and it kinda fell apart because alliances shifted and their membership became jaded, then the faction should naturally close down and eventually cease to be.

idk, that's a basic idea of my ideal outcome should guilds get nuked.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

Trimming down guilds/orgs

Comments