Ideas

[Dimetrius]

I would like to see religion/worship taking a more prominent place in the game aside from (very rare at this point) roleplay. Maybe not necessarily giving every aspect a huge mechanical benefit, but...something. Foo.

[Malic]

To pick one, hands down, its global plot arcs. They would be reoccuring events that take place over rl months and each one provides a small advancement in the overall story. They would include all factions, whether they are working together or against each other.
A little bit of mystery always works well, with the antagonists' goals not being obvious. This provides a choice for the indiviual realms whether to support the antagonist or not. Enal was a nice example of this, clearly against civilisation but believed in nature and the forests. Had any Ysallyrians been around when his trees attacked they would have had a hard choice to make. Killing living trees when your patron is the God of Forests could have had an interesting outcome.

See, five sentences. Maths is easy.

[Jaethor]

To pick one, hands down, its global plot arcs. They would be reoccuring events that take place over rl months and each one provides a small advancement in the overall story. They would include all factions, whether they are working together or against each other.
A little bit of mystery always works well, with the antagonists' goals not being obvious. This provides a choice for the indiviual realms whether to support the antagonist or not. Enal was a nice example of this, clearly against civilisation but believed in nature and the forests. Had any Ysallyrians been around when his trees attacked they would have had a hard choice to make. Killing living trees when your patron is the God of Forests could have had an interesting outcom.

See, five sentences. Maths is easy.

I'll uh... I'll keep that in mind. Hum.

[Ashrabia]

This is not a Idea, more so a wish list. I wish there was greater value to the Mercenary guards that populate at every Commodity center. Any ideas community?

[Demandred]

Idea: The ability for forsaken to preserve corpse's for devouring. (To prevent our symbiote's from starving during a long challenge).

[Demandred]

Armies and Warfare.

Instead of having to march your armies location by location by location by location....

How about you make your army. Give it food. And tell it where to go. It will march there itself, taking the same amount of time.

To stop an armies march, players of the opposing city could put up barricades (or engage the army with their own army).

The marching player/city would then have to destroy the barricade to allow their army to continue its march.


This would make warfare much better because it would eliminate the boring and tedious process of marching location by location.

It would also give city scouts something to do because when a senator/master/captain logs on a tell from a scout could be received informing them that an enemy army is marching.

[Silas]

When dealing with Cifara, maybe have a way to see which areas you have not completed? And if you're feeling really generous, have a way to determine how may rooms we're missing on current maps? That might be a bit too much. Really just hoping for the first one!

[Pyrok]

Idea: The ability for forsaken to preserve corpse's for devouring. (To prevent our symbiote's from starving during a long challenge).

"I'd like to take two elves and a side order of dwarf, and can you make it to go? I've got a duel to go to."

[Jaethor]

The first one won't happen because then you'd have a list of every area in akanbar (some of which may not have been discovered yet).

[Silas]

Fair enough! Thanks for the quick response.

[Ashrabia]

I'd like to see an expansion upon some of the Divine Laws. Not necessarily... greater explanations, but maybe revisions. Akanbar is a great place for all the different kinds of players. Those that don't wish to pursue combat shouldn't be forced to. And, with that in mind, I'd like to put this idea up for discussion.

Instead of the Divine Law being: No Player killing, unless there is a "very strong in-character reason attached to it". The problem with this definition is this, what is a 'very' strong in-character reasons? What I have felt to be a very strong in-character reason for jumping player X, has been deemed not strong enough in the Divine's eye many times throughout Ashrabia's life. However, through speaking with other gods and at various other moments in Ashrabia's life, the same offense would have been considered very in character.

Lets look at a few examples:

Roeshak tells you, "Fuck You"

Roeshak tells you, "Oh my goodness you repeat the same words, you are of so much regard! Please let me suck your cock your greatness."

Now, these examples are laughable. However, I as a player don't want to see that. yes, he is talking to my character? is he? I get called a bitch, and yaddayaddayadda.... so when I jump someone. There is very good in game reason. I don't like to be spit in the face... is that reason? my god, the examples come and go so quick.... it is ridiculous.

A question to the Divine that intervene or pass judgement on punishments... Do you even see/watch the entire event from start to beginning... Or, whoever whines first is probably right? This whole thing is a joke in my opinion.

I recently proposed that 'I', and maybe Elysium as a whole, serve as protectors of Monadh-dach. Basically, if I was within the village, witnessed a Dwarf be killed while in my presence, or made a statement to which I was protecting them, any that wish to challenge this would essentially be... 'asking' for a fight. This was denied. I understand generally why, as each player should be allowed to... experience Akanbar in his or her own way without interference. However, there is a very good in-character reason Ashrabia to want to protect Monadh-dach. Let me list just a few that come to mind: Forgiveness (Forsaken, i killed them constantly), Gratefullness (Runesmiths guild), Appreciation (Due to their efforts, the Temple of Lord Jaethor was built). Countless other reasons could be thought of as well.

Now, obvious what is 'very' in character reasons is going to vary from each mortal, to each god. However, lets look at Akanbar... Lets look at the foundation? if you will. Specifically Golgonath and Elysium. These two cities are at war. I'd argue that if you join either of these cities, you are looking for some level of conflict? Even more so, if you join a guild that is combat oriented, you are looking for some level of conflict of the combative nature.

Now, we have a rule, where if you kill a man's horse, even while the man is absent, then you have grounds of attacking this man, with or without challenging before hand. How is it not then Grounds to kill the man that sneaks into your city and kills your citizens, and or mages. How is it not acceptable to hold a group of men/women accountable for the actions of raiding your towers. Even if we are or are not present, aren't these actions in themselves of greater consequence than the simple action of killing a horse...? A horse that, no matter how many times you slay it, will always come back?

I would like to present this idea. Combat oriented guilds allowed to be killed 3 times. Not deaths from hunting, I mean deaths that come from, presumably their opposition. Non-combat oriented guilds are allowed to be killed once without challenge. For the ENTIRE month. This would also mean that there would need to be some sort of... method for each individual to check how many times that person had been killed that month.

Lets say David and I go at each other 3 times early in the morning. Ashrabia dies 3 times. David would not be able to kill Ashrabia without being in a mutual challenge, or on the bloodscroll for the rest of that month. Nor would any other player. Even if Roeshak wanted to later that evening, he'd be expected to check the 'killcount' before jumping Ashrabia.

As far as Non-combative guilds, I'd suggest that they be allowed to be jumped once per month. The reason why I say this is because although these guilds aren't specifically tasked to be defenders of their respective cities... Countless times, they partake in the offensive actions against the city they are at war with. Should they not be responsible as well?

Many of you might look at this post as me essentially whining. I only hope that you will re-read this post and see that there is a problem with Akanbar. It has become standard practice for cities to wait for all of their city enemies to vacate the realm in order to raid, in order for them to sneak into another city and kill their citizens and serfs and mages, in order for them to march armies. I won't stand her and say that I am not guilty of some of these things as well. It would only be considered insanity for you to do some of these things while there are 3-4 enemies roaming about. There are enough dangers involved with any of these three things, so why put yourself into further risk?

This is supposed to be a Mature game. Even if every player were at an in game age of 21, if a player went into your city and killed citizens that you knew, maybe even your next door neighbor, you wouldn't just sit by. If a man spit in your face or mocked you, or did some other uncivilized action, you wouldn't just sit there and take it. I mean, we have to place our self in the times and the environment that Akanbar is. I really just want people to be held accountable for their actions.

[Jaethor]

Greets,

The reason why PK rules aren't cut and dry laid out (along with a lot of other rules) is because say we have a rule that says you cannot jump people for verbal abuse. This means you can shout/tell Roeshak whatever foul things come to your mind. That's dumb. So, we add in the rule that you can jump people for verbal abuse. What defines verbal abuse? We'll have Roeshak jumping you for greeting him wrong or have get you jumping Roeshak for saying a word to you. We outline stuff for mortals and their first thought is "How can I use this to my advantage- staying within the law, but definitely being wrong." It's silly. So we don't write down cut and dry things and instead get to deal with things on a case-by-case basis.

If Roeshak said that to you out of the blue, calling you names, I'd be fine with you killing him. Just as if you have your golem constantly attacking someone, I'm fine with them killing you each time.

Now, obvious what is 'very' in character reasons is going to vary from each mortal, to each god. However, lets look at Akanbar... Lets look at the foundation? if you will. Specifically Golgonath and Elysium. These two cities are at war. I'd argue that if you join either of these cities, you are looking for some level of conflict? Even more so, if you join a guild that is combat oriented, you are looking for some level of conflict of the combative nature.

No, Golgonians aren't required to engage in combat against Elysians (and vice versa, Elysians aren't required against Golgonians). If you join the guard, sure, you're explicitly saying that. Even if you're in a combat guild, it could just be "Hey, I want to be able to shoot lightning from my hands while riding on a dragon like a badass". If you want to be peaceful, you shouldn't have to take up oats and hoes.

I would like to present this idea. Combat oriented guilds allowed to be killed 3 times. Not deaths from hunting, I mean deaths that come from, presumably their opposition. Non-combat oriented guilds are allowed to be killed once without challenge. For the ENTIRE month. This would also mean that there would need to be some sort of... method for each individual to check how many times that person had been killed that month.

No. There is no giving special treatment to guilds depending on what genre they fit in. No one is special.

This is supposed to be a Mature game. Even if every player were at an in game age of 21, if a player went into your city and killed citizens that you knew, maybe even your next door neighbor, you wouldn't just sit by. If a man spit in your face or mocked you, or did some other uncivilized action, you wouldn't just sit there and take it. I mean, we have to place our self in the times and the environment that Akanbar is. I really just want people to be held accountable for their actions.

You challenge people nonstop (I have seriously contemplated putting a limit on it because of you, but that was me being mean). If I were Roeshak or an actual handsome Golgonian, I would want to murder you in your sleep too. I don't know what goes on between you two and until one of you asks for me to step in (with ample logs to prove it's not all one sided), I'm letting you two beat the crap out of each other. Neither side right now is innocent. You both give each other ample reasoning to murder each other.

[Silas]

Oats and hoes, man.

On a real note, you have to play your character however you feel is right. Silas has jumped people a few times and I think only once(if that) has he gotten in trouble for it. If you play a certain way, keep to your character's beliefs/ideals/etc, you shouldn't have to worry about what the gods think. Then again, all of the bloodthirsty Elysians end up joining Golgonath anyways, so, as a player with a char there, see you soon! : D

[Ashrabia]

Jaethor. Everything you stated is correct. LOL. I say that because even as I wrote that really long post, I knew the very reasons you stated in terms of why this won't change. Or why it is the way it is now.

The reason why I presented it the way I did... or maybe I presented it poorly is because of this, and I have seen this time and time again, from Elysium and Golgonath both: A certain citizen will only sneak into the enemy city and kill citizens/serfs while the entire enemy city is slumbering. This same person won't engage in any combative skills. In this example, how is this not considered worse than killing a person's horse? Maybe I am the only one that thinks the horse rule is laughable... but if that is a law that is considered fair/right. Wouldn't this be true for anybody that can see the militarylog.

Same example essentially. If you are going to be using your skills to raid the enemies tower, then you should be opening yourself up to attacks of some sort. I shouldn't be-able to raid your towers when nobody is present, and stop simply because someone shows up. The Enemy city should be able to... exact vengence? Right the wrongs... within reason though. I am not saying that because Roeshak Killed a few citizens that for every citizen he killed, the entire city of Elysium gets to gank him. I am saying that if a man is going to take such actions, then he should be willing to take responsibility for them.

Accepting challenges is the first way, and by any reading this would be the most logical and acceptable method. However, when you are dealing with nothing but cowards and children, sometimes a different kind of action is needed. When you kid misbehaves, you don't ask him to come to you so a punishment can be handed out, you order him/her to come. That might not be a great example seeing that Roeshak is not my kid (If it were, I would have drowned it at birth for the shame it would have brought me if I lived would have ruined me).

[Ashrabia]

Then again, all of the bloodthirsty Elysians end up joining Golgonath anyways, so, as a player with a char there, see you soon! : D

So much I'd like to expand upon that, unfortunately, I shall not. Lets just say that if I ever 'returned' to Golgonath, half the morons within would still be on my list. Would it be in-character enough of a reason to slay those whom I feel aren't worthy of being in the Empire, assuming I was in Golgonath of course.