Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

Should be able to circumvent such a thing from happening if the guild provea to have been mainly inactive for lomger periods I would at least think.

FYI, to those thinking to reinstate the Reds of BG: I have an established Character that was always meant/RP/created for an antagonist role for Thayans.

If you can establish both the IC and OOC control of the Guild, send me a PM and if you are willing, we can do some story building together (pro/antagonist stuff).

Cheers.

[Edited by Moderator]

Our goal originally was to make the Thayan guild more of a focus as a trading guild, and less about doing horrible evil stuff to people, hence making a character specifically to maximize shop discounts ect. I still have this character as well, just in case the guild starts being fun again.

It is very disappointing that this has been allowed to happen.

Rask wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:34 pm[Edited by Moderator]

What a joke.
Having made the guildhall myself and having put a lot of hours into making sure it is a good one, it makes me sick to hear this. I'd much rather hear it is been used by people who are using it and enjoying it.

A new guildhall was put in like 2+ years ago.
The creator is Herisheft.

Sputnik wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2019 8:43 pm A new guildhall was put in like 2+ years ago.
The creator is Herisheft.

So he did, cool as. Just had a look at it and they did a phenomenal job with it too!

Regardless who created it, I would imagine they feel the same way I did above, if they knew it was going to waste. It would be a separate thread for it, but perhaps "the 6 months absence" is a bit excessive and potentially could be reviewed for change?

Few issues I've found in the Thayan's guild.


1. The description (examine) of the "Thayan Merchant" claims she is a sharply dressed man. (Side note: what does "visibly counting numbers" even mean?)

2. The description (examine) of the skull says "smeared by moist" which doesn't make sense.

3. The description (examine) of the "Important Information" board says nothing special, which doesn't make any lore sense.

4. The description (examine) of the "Sphynx Cat" has numerous errors and spelling problems, some examples "beautifull" "jewellery" "simmilar".

5. Ruby Golem also has similar issues with description as the cat.

Would really be cool if the guild could be revived, not sure what was said that it needed moderating but it is a shame for such a prestigious guild to lay in shambles...

BG needs the evil and semi-evil guilds to make it interesting in my opinion. Also I know of at least 2 Guilds that would love to have the RW active again for some collaborative events

The only thing would be;
Whoever leads it please be read up on their Lore and philosophy. This guild done right offers some needed spice to the intrigues in BG

I believe there is a guild sub forum. Is it possible to get access to that?

I've got two surface Mulan Thayans running around topside but may or may not tweak them.

Why are guild leaders of major factions not led by DM NPCs? I don't understand why a faction should be held hostage by inactive players.

Ewe wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 9:13 am Why are guild leaders of major factions not led by DM NPCs? I don't understand why a faction should be held hostage by inactive players.

Many have been debating for this change for a looong time, and even when Players within the Guild start to setup such a change, it is not very quickly nor long-ly picked up for support.

But I can offer an assumption as to why: the DM Team doesn't want to. E shouldered with the responsibility of "speaking for" Guilds through NPC leadership. If seen from their perspective, imagine how complicated it could be to control a Guild Leader NPC when the player request might be a confrontational one against the Guild/Faction that the DM has a PC in, or what about actually leads as a Player?

Because DMs remain Players during their tenure, there is much possibility for conflict of interest, and without a large DM Team population to allow for a greater likelihood of options of DMs that have no interest conflict to fulfill the request made to a Guild Leader NPC, the situation is a fine line balancing act.

Then again, here is an opportunity for DMs to weigh in themselves!

I feel like what you say makes perfect sense Steve I'd also add to it that it could lead to a party strong inconsistency in the behaviour of a leader if the DM was to change or simply not play that role all to frequently.

I think having players lead the factions is good, just that if someone proves to be hindering the guild by inactivity they should be exchanged... Which of course entails work but I fear there is not really a better way.

I don't want to be misunderstood: I DO support Guilds/factions ultimately led by a NPC, with "second in command" being a Player/PC, or even a player-driven counsel.

Why? Because so many times the Server has seen a Guild Leader PC wanting to do something IC that is denied OOC by Staff, then, that Guild Leader quits and the Guild death spirals.

If one is to be a true leader, then let them really lead, even if that puts IC pressure onto the Server!

However, if Guilds, ESPECIALLY Canon Lore Guilds, are NPC led, there is hierarchy that shall direct ideas and actions, and if the PC(s) doesn't fit that, OR cannot manipulate the NPC via IC action, ultimately, there is an IC out that actually has a potential to lead to more RP!!

Groups/clubs/factions should be Player led, because usually these remain nimble and have far less lasting nature (Canon Lore Guilds just simply won't die ever!! Even during the spellplague!!! WTF!! ).

There is plenty possibilities to organize the situation better, for all involved.