That would take away the power of a skill we already have. Necromancers already get a bonus to influencing undead.

No it wouldn't, you would have a bonus over us

I'd rather see one of the villages shift to be almost impossible for mag/glom to get than change the influence/communicate with undead mechanic. (Which has more relevance in the game than just village influencing, especially for glom.) To some extent it enforces roleplay. Unlike in Acknor, there's no quest to toggle off slavery in Angkrag... and I can't really see how Serenwilde and Celest can justify being okay with harnessing taint and undead masters to suppress dwarves. I know where alliance goes people might turn a blind eye, but maintaining Angkrag seems like it should be undesirable for either of the two lighter-shades-of-gray orgs. I'd much rather see an existing village (Shanthmark is a good suggestion) take on a 'reject wyrd/taint' stance.

As for Paavik... if the quest has been done (and it gets done a lot) the ghosts aren't around anyway - and they're only 6... I see this as much less of an issue. By all means, a similar thing balance could be implemented in another village where a handful of mobs refuse communication with glom/mag.

Balancing it the other way would be acceptable, too, except that it would be nice to be able to influence for amnesty, too (without always involving undead/crow peoples).

I would have a bonus over the bonus? I thought there was a limit for the number of stacked influencing bonuses.

There is.

The closest correlate to the powers that already exist would be a simple quest with an effect that lasts 7-10 RL days. That would leave you with the same temporary lapses in undead influencing coverage that all the other orgs deal with.

I remember reading amnesty influence was unfettered by undead issues (a long time ago). Has this changed?

You can't influence for amnesty with undead without the ability to influence undead. You can still parley with gold though, which while isn't the best option, is an option.

Whoops. Thanks Sarrasri.

I like the temporary 'reject wyrd/taint' quest idea. (Or disrupt crow-cloak quest. <_<;;)

Disrupt crow cloak quest is easy-peasy, but we can just make crow cloaks. It's a skill in Crow.

And is required for almost all of the abilities in Crow, too...

I remember Paavik being under seren influence years back I believe.

One possible answer would be to simply have defenses that allow the other orgs to influence certain mobs. This way it would not be "Oh you cannot influence me because you are tainty" but "Ah, the light of celestia/mother moon shines within you I will listen" same in the end but seems slightly better as the undead influence ability is just something that two orgs have and that others can gain technically. The issue is what villages and how you group the orgs.

Why make all this complication, instead of just giving a way to influence undead, since "taint" isn't half the basin anymore

Simple solution: Offer Krellan 2cr per crow cloak. I imagine he'd jump at it.

Naughty Krellan.

Give everyone the ability to do it. If you have to, make it something you preform in dramatics, but I'd rather just see it as a "ok, you can do this now" ability in influence.

It's simple, it's fair, and it does away with an odd mechanic that is at best archaic, and at worst, unfair.

If everyone can do it, then I think it's fair that the Mount Dio quest either not negatively effect Mags/Blacktalon, or it effect everyone in the Basin. Hmm. Which would be good since then crow cloaks can get another ability rather than than influencing undead.

Sure, just untaint the TBC too.

But those quests are a different animal well outside the scope of the original post.

TBC is indeed outside the scope of the original post. Dio is not, as the thread is about giving the entire player base the ability to influence undead- and in regards to village revolts, that is indeed fair. However as it seems communicating with undead incurs the negative effects of Dio (hence why only Crow users in Glom are effected), then it follows that any who can influence undead would suffer the same malus.

By that rationale, the TBC is included simply because one of the mobs that you influence is undead. It's pointless causality that detracts from the salient point of the original post.

That being, it is an atavistic mechanic set in place for archaic reasons that needlessly benefit two out of six orgs.

How often is Dio even done?

What reasons would be archaic in this regard? I've not heard anything definitive as to the motive behind the undead mobs and why only two orgs at this point can influence them- as in not seen the admin confirm or deny what has been brought up.

Mind you, I'm perfectly happy to see everyone influence undead. But then again, I also believe that there shouldn't be any restrictions as far as one org controlling all villages.