Neverwinter Nights 2 Persistent World BGTSCC Discussion Forum
https://bgtscc.net/
As has been said before, the amount of warlocks isn't the problem. It's the fact that most of them don't know the lore behind it.Hitman Hard wrote:We are pretending, there are only 70 people online, how many of those are warlocks? Definitely not enough to make it application only. What about all those NPCS walking around who are clearly not warlocks, ever though of that?
I like the word warlock, we would be going against pen and paper DND.Servin wrote:Now change the word 'warlock' with any other class name and I dare to say the sentence makes as much sense as before.Deathgrowl wrote:This isn't the point at all. People may play as evil as they want. It's not about that. It's all the terribly OOC warlocks grinding, and running all the time, without any knowledge or understanding of the lore behind their class. That is the problem.mrieder79 wrote:I LIKE all the new warlocks. It makes it more interesting. Now the OSR and the other good guilds can have something to monitor and talk about. God help us if we run out of evil to fight against! I find the encounters I have had with warlocks to be quite fun and invigorating.
Maybe the DM's should do that education camp idea I read in this post or the other, it seems silly to restrict potential people from playing the class just because their new. Having said that, i read the whole story on Asmodeus this morning and found it pretty fascinating.Deathgrowl wrote:As has been said before, the amount of warlocks isn't the problem. It's the fact that most of them don't know the lore behind it.Hitman Hard wrote:We are pretending, there are only 70 people online, how many of those are warlocks? Definitely not enough to make it application only. What about all those NPCS walking around who are clearly not warlocks, ever though of that?
I think Servin meant that can be applied to any class, not just Warlocks.Hitman Hard wrote:I like the word warlock, we would be going against pen and paper DND.Servin wrote:Now change the word 'warlock' with any other class name and I dare to say the sentence makes as much sense as before.Deathgrowl wrote:This isn't the point at all. People may play as evil as they want. It's not about that. It's all the terribly OOC warlocks grinding, and running all the time, without any knowledge or understanding of the lore behind their class. That is the problem.
Yeah. When I was new, I learned that my IC actions had IC consequences from more experienced RPers who paid me the courtesy of taking my RP seriously.Hitman Hard wrote:it seems silly to restrict potential people from playing the class just because there new.
Well, I still think that some classes are more demanding than others, in terms of lore knowledge and whatnot. But it's true that eventually, every player needs to learn lore of some kind to stay IC. For example, the hypothetical Fighter in the UD that you brought up earlier.Servin wrote:Have you read through the discussion from today? We've somewhat established that lack of server lore and player quality has no connection to the class being played.
I agree, that's the problem. If we made a base class application only, one will mean to limitate players' freedom. To gain what? I don't think it's a good trade. Other ways should be chosen, amd that's not fair that all warlocks players pay for other's faults.Servin wrote: Is it a reason to restrict a class from being played?
to quote Winston Churchill, "the main drawback of freedom of speech can be discovered by simply chatting for five minutes with the average person". Making a class application only would limitate players' freedom, aye, but would also help to avoid some monstrosities we are seeing as of late. Because really, things like an aasimar warlock are a huge monstrosity from an rp perspective.Eden wrote: I agree, that's the problem. If we made a base class application only, one will mean to limitate players' freedom. To gain what? I don't think it's a good trade. Other ways should be chosen, amd that's not fair that all warlocks players pay for other's faults.
totally agreed.Making the class application-only is something that can easily be done, and is indeed already done for RWs and their Knights. IMO, it worked wonderfully to promote the RP of those Thayan classes.
So I agree that something should be done. Warlock levels are currently being taken for the OOC build benefits, but the lore behind warlocks is too complex and has too many IC ramifications for that kind of playing style. This was the same rationale for making RWs application-only, so I think it's reasonable to do it for warlocks.
This makes me very, very queasy, in fact my belly is violently swirling. I fear the day I log in and can no longer RP at all because i am now KOS! To me personally, this is crazy talk. In character and out. What do you mean we need to reach a resolution? let people learn the game, learn the class, there is a lot of lore to be consumed. Plain and simple.Darksider_war wrote:to quote Winston Churchill, "the main drawback of freedom of speech can be discovered by simply chatting for five minutes with the average person". Making a class application only would limitate players' freedom, aye, but would also help to avoid some monstrosities we are seeing as of late. Because really, things like an aasimar warlock are a huge monstrosity from an rp perspective.Eden wrote: I agree, that's the problem. If we made a base class application only, one will mean to limitate players' freedom. To gain what? I don't think it's a good trade. Other ways should be chosen, amd that's not fair that all warlocks players pay for other's faults.
And I'd prefer to curb the freedom of the players rather than having to see such mostrosities as the ones I am currently seeing with almost all of the new warlocks running around. And before someone replies with "but there are clerics/rogues/whatever running around", well, clerics are policed by the staff if they stray too much, rogues do not draw their powers from sovranatural beings, and wizards/sorcerers lose their connection to the weave only VERY rarely (and only if Mystra gets pissed off with them).
Considering what has already transpired, the class needs to be policed one way or the other. So, whether warlocks are made KOS as soon as they go blasting (and I wouldn't mind such a resolution, but then again, that would cause huge tons of griefing and issues with people griefing on both sides), or can be legally prosecuted (Captured, brought to the fist, then executed or whatever, as long as the dms don't make them get out of detention the day after), or the class is made application only, I don't really care as long as results are obtained.
totally agreed.Making the class application-only is something that can easily be done, and is indeed already done for RWs and their Knights. IMO, it worked wonderfully to promote the RP of those Thayan classes.
So I agree that something should be done. Warlock levels are currently being taken for the OOC build benefits, but the lore behind warlocks is too complex and has too many IC ramifications for that kind of playing style. This was the same rationale for making RWs application-only, so I think it's reasonable to do it for warlocks.
Hitman Hard wrote:This makes me very, very queasy. My belly is violently swirling. I fear the day I log in and can no longer RP at all because i am now KOS! To me personally, this is crazy talk. In character and out. What do you mean we need to reach a resolution? let people learn the game, learn the class, there is a lot of lore to be consumed. Plain and simple.Darksider_war wrote:to quote Winston Churchill, "the main drawback of freedom of speech can be discovered by simply chatting for five minutes with the average person". Making a class application only would limitate players' freedom, aye, but would also help to avoid some monstrosities we are seeing as of late. Because really, things like an aasimar warlock are a huge monstrosity from an rp perspective.Eden wrote: I agree, that's the problem. If we made a base class application only, one will mean to limitate players' freedom. To gain what? I don't think it's a good trade. Other ways should be chosen, amd that's not fair that all warlocks players pay for other's faults.
And I'd prefer to curb the freedom of the players rather than having to see such mostrosities as the ones I am currently seeing with almost all of the new warlocks running around. And before someone replies with "but there are clerics/rogues/whatever running around", well, clerics are policed by the staff if they stray too much, rogues do not draw their powers from sovranatural beings, and wizards/sorcerers lose their connection to the weave only VERY rarely (and only if Mystra gets pissed off with them).
Considering what has already transpired, the class needs to be policed one way or the other. So, whether warlocks are made KOS as soon as they go blasting (and I wouldn't mind such a resolution, but then again, that would cause huge tons of griefing and issues with people griefing on both sides), or can be legally prosecuted (Captured, brought to the fist, then executed or whatever, as long as the dms don't make them get out of detention the day after), or the class is made application only, I don't really care as long as results are obtained.
totally agreed.Making the class application-only is something that can easily be done, and is indeed already done for RWs and their Knights. IMO, it worked wonderfully to promote the RP of those Thayan classes.
So I agree that something should be done. Warlock levels are currently being taken for the OOC build benefits, but the lore behind warlocks is too complex and has too many IC ramifications for that kind of playing style. This was the same rationale for making RWs application-only, so I think it's reasonable to do it for warlocks.