In your character's opinion.

Serenwilde characters do not follow Glomdoring beliefs. Hence, they aren't always going to take things said at face value.

"Hey wow, Glomdoring says its good for Nature now... we'd better go make friends!!"

Anyway, read public post #599, Daganev. No need to argue IC stuff on here.

Its my charachter's opinion?

No, its frikin GAME MECHANICS!

I don't care what beliefs charachters have, I do care when people use so called 'quest information' to lie to people about the nature of things in the game.

You can just read the event posts, its all right there.

There are more than just two options you know? You don't have to love or hate things, you could always be indifferent or warry, or curious, or humoured, pity, a whole range of opinions!

Well IC, Narsrim's chosen God told Him that the Wyrd had no more honor than the Taint and was to be eliminated so there you have it... indifference doesn't achieve that.

Daganev, Glomdoring's whole stance was against game mechenics for a long time. Remember the 'we are not tainted!' thing?

It's game mechanics that the word 'Taint' is no longer used.

It is not in the game mechanics how Wyrd is related to Taint, or what it means to Serenwilde

Speaking with White Hart:

Taint, heh.

I am talking about the Crow quests, and the whole killing fae thing, not talking about the Wyrd forest.

And Quidgyboo, the whole "not tainted" thing was an issue of semantics.
You say spoiled milk, I say Yogurt, its the same thing, but I will insist that I'm not eating spoiled milk.


Also, as far as I can tell, some of you still think that Soulless=Tainted, which is really really ignorant. From a 100% OOC persepctive.

Even if it did, game mechanics like has been said many times by the divine, should not dictate your RP.

And if you don't think Magnagora and Glomdoring are friendly with eachoter, you really need to login more. Magnagorians and Glomdoringers raided Celestia and the water plane together, Nok and Kurt attacked Thoros together, Magnagora lended aide during the recent influencing of Southgard, Magnagorians show up to defend Glomdoring territory.

These all show friendlyness, and denying it is the same as saying that Narsrim isn't friendly to Celest.

Then you're not talking about 90% of why Serenwilde might oppose Glomdoring. I'd say more like 50%.

Especially since as you can see above, the Crow/Hart conflict is as strong as ever on our side.

My dear Malicia, I do honestly believe that you still haven't read this thread properly. Indeed, last time you posted, I distinctly remember recomending that as a worth while use of your time. You're coming across now as vicious ("its got you so worked up that you're near tears"), and that makes you sound young. A good flame is delivered by destroying your opponent's argument in a humiliating manner, not trading playground insults.

Please read the following sentences carefully.

I concede that Conflict is Interesting. I also accept that Conflict is the substance for excellent roleplay. I agree that if you wanted to avoid pvp and in depth r-p, you might go to FF online. These are very exciting points, Malicia. I'm glad you made them. However, while you whinge that those who complain about bad sportsmanship annoy you, you demonstrate your ignorance as to the definition of sportsmanship that has been promulgated over the last 8 pages of thread.

When we play Lusternia, there are two parts to us. The first is our player. That's you or me - as we are here. The -real- us. The second is a character. This is a fictitious invention that often bares no resemblance to the player. Our character has certain goals and aims. Aiakon wishes to taint the entire basin, and exterminate anyone who disagrees. He will (probably) remain fanatical about that until I get bored of Lusternia and leave. In character, Good sportsmanship is a ridiculous idea (unless you happen to be of the class of knight that believes in honour). In character, Aiakon would happily stab you in the back. Out of character, I believe that we can all have a lot more fun if we have some consideration for each other. This does not have to compromise our roleplay. I repeat. This does not have to compromise our roleplay. It simply means playing the game as though it were a game. Lusternia is -not- a life substitute, and should not be treated as such. If, somehow, Aiakon became a sufficient fighter to own Malicia time and time again, and Aiakon had the where-with-all to repeatedly slay you, the character Aiakon would very much wish to. However, I, as player would kill you (this situation is of course hypothetical.. Aiakon can't pk for shit) no more than perhaps twice. Of course, Aiakon the character would want to kill you more, and I would RP doing so.. but I would do so sufficiently incompetently that you'd escape. It's that sort of thing. There is no need for the way we Roleplay our characters to dictate how we behave, nor is the excuse of Roleplay a sufficient one for what is essentially naught but Out of character vindictiveness.

Naturally, I'm living in cloud cookoo land. The extent to which every IRE realm has to legislate player killing and the like shows that in a game like this the play of the lowest common denominator will always set the tone. However, my complaints and suggestions are valid and are not to be sneered at. More to the point, Malicia, they should not be misunderstood.

That's fine, I never was against your right to roleplay Glomdoring as you wished. But going from a purely mechanical perspective, Glomdoring was coded as being Tainted. No word of words or arguments of semantics stand up to that UNLESS you allow others to use the same argument to say that Glomdoring is still Tainted.

Wyrd/Taint, it's all the same to many characters and very different to others, just as spoilt milk/yoghurt are the same to some and different to others.

EDIT: To clarify what I mean; you cannot use one argument to justify your stance (Glomdoring not being Tainted in the past, though the mechanics say it was) and then deny us the same argument (Glomdoring is still Tainted, even though mechanics say it is Wyrden). It just makes no sense. If the argument is good for you, it's good for others.

Very intersting, You should be really pissed off at celest then, and not Glomdoring.

Or was ladantine not a member of Celest? :roll:

Thats like arguing that Water and Ethereal forest are the same thing.

Many of us are are. That doesn't have anything to do with how we feel about Glomdoring.

In YOUR characters opinion.

There are NO facts in this argument.

The mechanics say there is Taint, and there is Wyrd. That is all. The rest is for our characters to interpret.

There is a lot of effort and subtelty between what different things are in Lusternia. Its dissapointing that on the forums, players can't see the differences and turn everything into a yes or no state.

In Glomdoring atleast, they may not like Hart and Moon, but they still respect them as Nature Spirits. Magnagora might be nice people, but they are still a city. But thats why Glomdoring is getting larger everyday, and the other places are getting smaller. imho.

Daganev:

Yes, the game mechanics probably (there can be argument, but I believe it's true) that the Glomdoring is no longer Tainted.

That, however, is the OOC matter of it.

IC: Why is it so bad to consider that Serenwilde believes the whole thing to be hogwash? Yes, that makes Serenwilde wrong, but arguing their character's actions should not be done because it's wrong is silly.

Narsrim's character believes that Glomdoring is tainted, that's it. It could be right, wrong, or stupid of his character.. you can even claim that it makes Serenwilde the 'evil' group. You can't, however, claim that Serenwilde has no reason to attack due to those reasons, misconceptions or not.

I know Jacquin still considers Glomdoring Tainted, to the point of thinking that it was all a cute lightshow and a new name. To her eyes, Magnagora could bring a few mages, grab a bunch of taint, make it glow and go "We're not Tainted anymore! We use the 'Light'" and do the same thing. Of course, she also believes that Serenwilde's true purpose is to form an empire to rival the old Celestine empire.

So no, using RP arguments to say a person can't hate another group is just Blah.

As for the main topic: We can't realy demand that people ONLY raid when other, powerful people are around, no matter how 'unsportsmanlike' it is. That's just one of the things that we have to deal with in a 24/7 running game. If 10 strong fighters are availible on one side and they feel up to fight they are going to fight. Blah, if a nation become so powerful that no one else can stand up to them then what do we do: Just say that the powerful nation should never raid? BLAH!

The best way to balance it, imo, is to make it recoverable once the parties are gone. Celest goes and kills the seawolves with no one to stop them? Fine, I'll go and gather dolphins after they leave and rebuild the fleet. Earth is raided when novices are around? When the big guns are back then go raid Water.

This is from one of those 'lowbes' who can only die to a major raid.

I see more sense in arguing that Wyrd equals Taint (Glomdoring present) than Taint does not equal Taint (Glomroding past), but that's just me.

EDIT: Daganev you do not want things to be black or white, yet you deny us the right to make choices of our own?

Please tell me what are you smoking?