I honestly have no idea why people appear to have such hatred.

I can see why you want to play up having such hatred, but not why anyone would actually feel it in any OOC way.

Take a clue from Glomdoring and learn that you can RP anything you like. The really nice thing about Viravain was that she showed us that we can move things in any direction we want it to go, as long as you do it properly. What was best about this was that she showed that to us without every going OOC about it, and the people who became her 'inner circle' were the ones who were able to realize that without ever breaking the illusion.

Sounds more like you never participated in Glomdoring, and don't know how well it worked. The only problem that I saw was that Glomdoring did not have the highest level of PK able to teach other players how to work with them quick enough to fight back.

I'm not sure what hatred you are referring to - the comments about why Serenwilde would hate Glomdoring in game, and vice versa?

All I have heard on this thread is how bad Glomdoring in that it doens't allow people to roleplay or some such nonsense like that.

I'm wondering if anyone remembers when Merloch decided that tree spirits don't like the Undead and suddenly make that part of Serenwilde. Estarra said that such things are ok, and we should play with them.

The difference there is that Merloch was abusing his position to promote a rabidly anti-Magnagora and pro-Celest point of view. A lot of his ideas seemed to have little basis in the reality of a situation and instead focus on the end he wanted to achieve: Celenwilde v. Magnagora. It made for some intriguing roleplay (for a time), but I don't think it has particularly appealing wide-spread use. It wasn't a holistic and developed roleplay, it was a specific and focused agenda. People tend to get tired of sticking their heads in the sand and playing ostrich, you know?

It would be nice to see Serenwilde and Glomdoring become less of extremes. There are two main ways that I can see to accomplish this:
1. Allow Glomdoring to enslave Fae through some means that does not involve killing them. Enslave, fine. Kill, no.
2. Play-up, or create more Commune v. City quests that have tangible and desireable results. The current ones don't pass the risk/reward ratio test. Kidnapping Fae to convert to the Taint/Light is viewed as an abhorrence by the Serenwilde (and presumably Glomdoring), and is more or less a declaration of war. It would be nice to have some ways to more subtly affect the Communes or Cities that provides an impetus for them to work with their like kind, but that doesn't spur immediate bloodshed.

To be honest, I find the whole killing thing odd myself. As an option it makes sense to me, and adds a certain aspect about rebirth in Glomdoring and all that jazz, but I also don't think that would reduce any of the extremeism from Serenwilde.

I think Glomdoring proved that a united group of leaders can have the populace feeling and acting in any which direction is found necessary at the time. If a community wants to stick its head in the sand on any issue, its very viable. Magnagora and Celest even did it for a time over the innersea.

The only thing continuing the extremism is players. There are many game mechanics that people like to ignore when they arn't part of thier goals, simply because they arn't activly being worked on at that moment.

For example, for a while Magangora had a trade war with the other commuhities, as efforts in that area died down, so did intrest in Merchant clans and commodity quests.

I didn't say it wasn't possible, I said it wasn't desireable nor sustainable. Few people want to roleplay such an extremist point of view for any serious length of time, and I don't think the game should really encourage such a static or one-sided view. There's a big differnce between some political spin and the sort of extremist, single-minded POV that you were referring to with Merloch.

Interesting roleplay isn't about adopting a "flavor of the week" approach where your organization is required to do a complete 180 every so often. It's nice to see various avenues of roleplay that are complex, intertwined and holistic in nature. Sticking your head in the sand on a particular issue is a lot different from relying on sticking your head in the sand as the basis for your character or community. One relies on ever-changing complexities of both their character development and the world around them, the other on a one-sided perspective of the game, such as Taint v. not-Taint to the exclusion of everything else.

Serenwilde has yet to drop its Extremist RP, so I'm not sure what you mean by its not sustainable.

The Fae hold a sacred place in Serenwilde, and Glomdoring is forced to continually slaughter them if they want to get anywhere with Faethorn. I don't call Serenwilde's view towards Glomdoring extremist given the current and continuing situation. That is why I called for a way for Glomdoring to enslave/infest the Fae without killing them.

However, Serenwilde fights anyone who is Taint, not anyone who once touched a fae.

Bear in mind, Serenwilde was attacking glomdoring long before they knew that Glomdoring had to kill fae. Nor have they ever stopped attacking Magnagora since they had the power to do so.

Yeah, defending ourselves against Magnagora is the epitomy of extremism, never forget that.

Yeah, we attacked Glomdoring long before they had to kill the Fae. Because obviously nothing ELSE about their existence is anathema to what we stand for, of course not. That big black bird up there? He's only kidding when he says he wants to kill White Hart. A real joker, he is.

Uh, anyway. Someone find the "off" button on Daganev again, please. :/

So yeah, being as I was there when Narsrim said FU to Fain, I'm not even going to start...

Regardless of whether Glomdoring actually kill fae or not (and because of taint-based fae serenwilde actually kills them now too, technically), Glomdoring is still anathema to the Serenwilde and vice versa. I don't think that is going to change, and nor should it.

Magnagora and Celest are in the same situation with regards to each other idealogically, but the difference is (and I'm somewhat assuming here) that their conflict quests are less routine and less central to the beliefs of either organization. You can't just waltz into Nil and convert a Demon to the Light when no-one's looking. You can't turn Elohora to the worship of taint by spending enough time focused on one activity.

I don't think reducing the antagonism between Serenwilde and Glomdoring is the answer at all, and I would be disappointed if suddenly Glomdoring -didn't- want to kill the fae to enslave them, or Serenwilde stopped caring about the health of the Great and Lesser Spirits, or some great Gaia figure appeared that speaks unto us and commands the communes to unite to tear down those bastard cities.

I don't have an answer, but I hesitatingly would like to see the expression of our antagonism a little more subtle or difficult than it is now, and the relationship of each commune (not communes plural) with the cities explored and developed.

Also, remember, every time Daganev tells the whole rest of the world that we're doing our roleplay wrong, just say "Daganev, you went krokani." Nothing more needs to be said.

I understand and agree with your point, but your analogy is off, because you actually can do both of those.

Really? Nuts, I have to learn more about the city quests.

Hm. This raises an interesting (to me) RP justification question. Why is it OK to kill a fae who has been "bound in shadows", or is a sluagh or what have you? You are then killing a fae who is under sway of one of the Great Spirits that make up Queen Maeve, to convert them to another of the Great Spirits that make up Queen Maeve, which is the same process we use in the first place.

Or, maybe I'm wrong, as I'm not really clear on the Seren side of things. Once we kill/convert a fae, you have to kill it to bring it back? If this is so, I don't see any justification for it other than "our side is good, and your side is bad". Which is fine, people IC should believe that their side is better, but it's a far cry from "We're just trying to protect the fae, which you lot MURDER and KILL!".

I'm not trying to be antagonistic here, just trying to work out the RP angles from all sides, as much as possible.

I think it's more their enslavement in shadows that we object to rather than their killing, actually. We don't appreciate their being dead, obviously, but it's better that we "kill" (keep in mind the Fae are actually immortal, mind you. They never truly die.) a Fae that you guys have bound in shadows, reunite it with its body and bring it into the protection of Mother Moon than just to leave it all tortured and in the shadows or as some sort of bizarre Imp/ObnoxiousFlyingBaby.

In case you're wondering, though, the reasoning behind a change in Glomdoring's killing Fae isn't because then we'd be less hostile about you stealing them.

Hm. Seems there's conflicting reports then, both from other people's justifications, and IC stuff. In Elryn's big thread where he posted all his various musings through the years about Why Glomdoring and Shadow Faelings Are Bad, Mm'kay?, there's a conversation there with Queen Maeve about how the fae are basically neutral to the conflict, and that Maeve is made up from all the Great Spirits, Night included.

So, if Serenwilde actually doesn't care about the specific act of killing the fae, because they're immortal anyway and "killing" them just brings them to either Moon or Night, then it's not such a high moral duty to "protect" them. You're just "protecting" them from what you see as bad, that is, duty to Mother Night. It's not actually something bad, because they don't actually die, and they just go into service to another entity which is part of Queen Maeve.

Hm.

EDIT: Fixed a typo, cause I'm retentive like that.

I think that is indeed the reason, though I certainly could be wrong not being of the Seren myself. They see Glomdoring and Night as bad, so they want to protect the fae from them and keep them loyal to Moon.