Shattered Kingdoms

Where Roleplay and Tactics Collide
VOTE NOW!
It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 8:33 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

What is your first choice? ([i]there will be another thread for your 2nd and 3rd choices as well[/i])
Poll ended at Thu Dec 28, 2006 11:59 am
Religion Specific Spells 18%  18%  [ 11 ]
Dual Membership 20%  20%  [ 12 ]
New Skills/Spells ([i] class specific, bind/drag, trade skills, etc.[/i]) 13%  13%  [ 8 ]
Kingdom/Tribunal Warfare System 8%  8%  [ 5 ]
New Class 8%  8%  [ 5 ]
New Race 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
Vehicles (including outerplane travel) 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Tweak CRS 18%  18%  [ 11 ]
Symbol Powers 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
Armor System 7%  7%  [ 4 ]
Tweak Familiarity System 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 61
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:32 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 10:33 am
Posts: 570
Syndal wrote:
Ok, I have a serious question. HOW CAN YOU ACTUALLY SUGGEST DUAL MEMBERSHIP WITHOUT BREAKING DOWN AND LAUGHING?


There is a huge thread that covers this concern. Not to mention, it would be ignorant to believe that Dual Membership just meant you could join two organizations without any other changes. I'm sure that concern will be address if the time comes.

Salak wrote:
You forgot to mention that this does absolutely nothing to help the MC/Empire


Again, this was covered in the above mentioned thread.

Lei Kung


Last edited by Lei_Kung on Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:34 pm 
The MC seriously needs a few wizard NPCs, it's not like their abilities are awesome. :-?

Yes, I remember that thread. Like I said in my post just now, the problem is most of those changes wouldn't make sense RP-wise, like the dual members not being able to order guards? There's no point in dual membership then, other than the law immunity.


Last edited by Syndal on Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:35 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:36 am
Posts: 1471
I always thought that bring back the the cabals into tribs would be the thing to do but that is not that great because some of the RP does not make it possible.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:42 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2002 4:00 pm
Posts: 656
SK Character: Salak
I have to admit, I'm not all that motivated to read that thread.

You might ask why. You may not care.

What it boils down to is: I want NEW THINGS. I don't want changes to old things. That isn't going to do much to create new things to do in SK. Dual membership appeals more to power-gaming and PK than it does to RP. I can RP a dual membership now, if I wanted to and had a decent supporting cast from the other cabal/tribunal.

I can't RP a new class without making myself look like a fool.

I'm going to continue my campaign for new and fresh ideas in 2007, not old and/or revamping ideas for existing things.

NEW FOR `07! Standardized armor, the alchemist class and spheres of priest magic!

:D

EDIT: Fixed big red typo.


Last edited by Salak on Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:49 pm 
It might help your campaign if you fix the big red typo. :P

And I agree that a new class would be really nice, I just can't decide what I'd want. :-?


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:58 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 10:33 am
Posts: 570
Salak wrote:
Dual membership appeals more to power-gaming and PK than it does to RP. I can RP a dual membership now, if I wanted to and had a decent supporting cast from the other cabal/tribunal.


You are totally wrong in that Dual Membership only appeals to PKers and Power gamers. It might appeal to them, but it will appeal to those that love RP as much if not more. Be it the intrigue, the greater customization of your character, the internal conflict a character can run into, or any number of RP aspects Dual Membership would bring about. There are just as many reasons to support Dual Membership for RP (if not more) then for PK or Power gaming reasons. Again please consider reading the thread so this thread doesn't turn into a rehash of that one.

If dual membership isn't a priority for you then that is fine. But please don't baselessly attack it or spread faulty concepts just because you want something else more.

Lei Kung


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:09 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2002 4:00 pm
Posts: 656
SK Character: Salak
Just so you know, my opinions are never faulty. I believe I said "appeals more" not "appeals only", but that's just picking apart arguments on semantics, right? ;)

I won't rehash it. Promise. I just disagree with you. I don't think that you necessarily need code to RP what you're asking for, and you do. We could argue it in circles of course, but that'd just do what we said we don't want to do.

Just as a last point: I'd rather play an alchemist in the Adepts or Harlies and angle something BRAND NEW IN `07. I'd be more fun than playing a paladin in the *yawn* Hammer+Keepers or a priest in the *yawn* Fist+Talons or a necro in the *double yawn* Adepts+Council since those have already been accomplished in other RP'd forms by dozens of players in the past.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:25 pm 
Offline
Implementor

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 4:00 pm
Posts: 8220
Location: Redwood City, California
While it was forward thinking of Lei Kung to compile a list and start these threads, I wish he'd asked me about it first. I voted on these three threads and will take note of how it turns out, but I still plan to compile my own list from the original thread based on my priorities and ideas that I saw on there that didn't make it into here.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:18 pm 
Offline
Mortal

Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 10:33 am
Posts: 570
Sorry D, I didn't mean to over step my bounds. Since you were looking for player input I just figured it was an organizational step, a convenient way for you (and anyone else interested) to more easily see what is important to the pbase and to what degree. SK is your baby and if there are things you do or don't find important, it is your say. I had no intention of stepping on your toes and I see you realize that. None the less I apologize and will be more conscious of it in the future.

Lei Kung


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:12 pm 
Dulrik wrote:
While it was forward thinking of Lei Kung to compile a list and start these threads, I wish he'd asked me about it first. I voted on these three threads and will take note of how it turns out, but I still plan to compile my own list from the original thread based on my priorities and ideas that I saw on there that didn't make it into here.


You should post your own poll, D. Your vision with what the players would like. We're all interested in seeing it.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 68 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group