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

While browsing this thread, I wanted to express my opinion, but then thought it actually deserves a separate topic.

Rask's post was edited, but I remember what was there and what sort of nonsense happened. And I thoroughly believe Rask because Red Wizards is not the only guild on the server (won't point fingers here) that is held as a hostage by a long retired player who refuses to hand over leadership while doesn't even play this game, and only when some questions rise, that player briefly returns, imitates activity for a day or two and... retires again. It's beyond me what drives these people, but such behavior is not only counter-productive, it's destructive for the server well-being. It doesn't only kill all the possible guild activity, it also prevents any actually enthusiastic and active players from even trying to bring life to it.

My point is simple and just. Retired players shouldn't hold any leadership positions.

I can understand if a leader became semi-active due to burnout or RL reasons and is open for compromises, but when a player abandoned the server and shows up once per half a year to make sure nobody claims their throne... well, it's not even funny at this point.

The people who can help us solve it are DMs. Imagine a group of people want to start a new wave of a certain guild's RP, but retired leader cuts all their advances while not even playing this game. This group goes to the DMs and asks to remove that player from the position of power. DMs try to contact the player and ask their opinion about it. If the player keeps refusing to talk / keeps getting complaints, the player is removed from the leadership position with a RP justification (being DMs, you can make up any RP reasons and it would be legit). After it, the guild receives another chance and breathes again.

So... I would encourage DMs to take a pro-player position here and respond to such requests. Change policy regarding guild leadership if needed.

I agree. I've seen several guilds die over my eight years active on the server due to players being inactive (not necessarily retired) and still insisting on hogging the guild leadership. I've seen some of those guilds get rebuilt later, but it takes a massive amount of effort.

I mean, sometimes players want to keep playing but their real life keeps them busy. That's fine. Completely fine. But it would be best for everyone if those players then step down so that the guild doesn't stagger in their inactivity, even if they log in for 2 hours every Wednesday. That's just not enough for a guild leader to lead a guild.

Could make it require either an OOC or an IC vote to keep guild leadership positions, once every 6 months or so, with ability to participate being tied to "at least x hours/week". OOC/IC -ness dependent on how the guild's lore goes.


I do however understand the danger of it - it is not unheard of that players who have not played in months/years to show up during such votes and vote unanimously towards their friend. So that would require something of a protection against, too.

It could also potentially be abused to gain IC advantage through OOC means.

If those issues could be solved, it'd be a good solution.

KOPOJIbPAKOB wrote:The people who can help us solve it are DMs. Imagine a group of people want to start a new wave of a certain guild's RP, but retired leader cuts all their advances while not even playing this game. This group goes to the DMs and asks to remove that player from the position of power. DMs try to contact the player and ask their opinion about it. If the player keeps refusing to talk / keeps getting complaints, the player is removed from the leadership position with a RP justification (being DMs, you can make up any RP reasons and it would be legit). After it, the guild receives another chance and breathes again.

What you describe here pretty much covers exactly what happens. Every case is different, though, so DM involvement varies somewhat from situation to situation. If you have a problem with your guild leader's activity levels, the first thing you should do is attempt to communicate with them and sort it out. If that doesn't prove to be successful, send a message to the DM Team and we will try to work something out for you.

This is a great and excellent post, it was a problem that was happening on another server i played on, DMs stepped in and basically said at minimum you are require to do stuff at least once a month, else, step aside and let some one with more time do guild activity. Whether folks people like it or not, a guild is at times, the life line of both server and the Rp of many, when a leader is absent for a long time, it is only expected and fair for others that they step aside and let others take over and run things.

I find, rare as the case may be, I agree with Koppo here.

In large majority inactive characters heading up guilds or honestly worse is active leaders who make zero effort to drive RP or promote RP for their members are a big reason we see people idling about campfire 'iching and moaning there is nothing to do.

I don't however think the majority of the people gate keeping guilds are doing it for the wrong reasons. It could very well be they don't know how to end the story they've been telling, are not ready for it to end, or are worried that the new blood won't respect the history or the principles that the organization was founded on.

At the end of the day the DM team can only do so much and the large majority of cases need to be resolved with interpersonal communication between prospective new leaders and old guard both to assuage fears of taking the guild down and path not intended and to ensure the role and contributions of previous members is respected.

It's after all plain to see how attached people can get to their stories and achievements within the server in that regard we all need to be mindful of eachothers goals and desires while respecting the legacy of the things we seek to revitalize.

The DM teams role in such things should be to step in only when there is a 100% break in communication. If one party is being unreasonable then it should fall to the DM staff or Admins to step in to mediate for the long term health of the server.

Remember we're a small community and a smaller and smaller table as time goes on. We owe it to each other and ourselves to keep this collective hobby alive and keep telling fantastic stories.

I agree 100% with the OP.

The most responsible and respectful thing a player can do, when running a guild, should be to ensure its health and longevity by putting player ego aside, and promptly passing the torch. There are some very interesting and influential guilds(many who have come, and then vanished into obscurity) that simply deserve better than to be left hanging.

My simple advice to retiring leaders is this: If you were ever genuinely invested in your guild, be respectful and hand the reigns to someone else before wandering away.

Conversely, my simple advice to aspiring players wanting to see any their guild(if it has absent leadership) flourish would be: Take the reigns, in a respectful and accommodating manner, and dedicate yourself to pushing things forward with responsible role-play.

~edited for clarity~

Azure wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:05 pm Take the reigns, in a respectful and accommodating manner, and dedicate yourself to pushing things forward with responsible role-play.

just wanted to reiterate the respectful part since just trying to take something with members of the guild still playing and especially when you are not in said guild is a hostile takeover and doesnt go well

More thoughtful guild leaders will put measures in place if they're expecting a long-term absentia, like I did when I was in charge of the Sharrans. If you are a guild leader and you are not actively scoping for a potential replacement for yourself/your character, you are on track to failing your guild in my opinion. Obviously handovers in some guild environments (especially secret/occult guilds) are a little trickier, but that is where OOC collaboration and friendships with your guildies can really help. I cannot express enough how important it was to get to know the Sharran groupies OOCly over Discord, even if each guild member occupied their specific IC level of initiation into the overall guild structure.

Consideration, collaboration, co-operation.

Unfortunately, there are a select few self-absorbed players whose innate selfishness results in situations hinted at by Mr. Cancer King. This is really where DMs need to put their foot down.

well can you make a small order in side the guild so if the guild not moveing the order dose?

I think this is spot on.

One way IMO this can be handled playerside is to not have a single guildleader that is effectively the only person able to do stuff. A leadership council of a few people means there's overlap and such in the event one person is taken out of the picture for a time.

Those multiple people ensure that if one person is gone that things can be done like inviting new members, handling keys and promotions, etc. And if someone knows they won't be coming back then they can always hand things over.

Active leadership is more important than a single active leadsr. A guildleader needs to be willing to delegate and trust their peers to handle things, rather than trying to micromanage.

Tsidkenu wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:55 pm More thoughtful guild leaders will put measures in place if they're expecting a long-term absentia, like I did when I was in charge of the Sharrans. If you are a guild leader and you are not actively scoping for a potential replacement for yourself/your character, you are on track to failing your guild in my opinion. Obviously handovers in some guild environments (especially secret/occult guilds) are a little trickier, but that is where OOC collaboration and friendships with your guildies can really help. I cannot express enough how important it was to get to know the Sharran groupies OOCly over Discord, even if each guild member occupied their specific IC level of initiation into the overall guild structure.

Consideration, collaboration, co-operation.

Unfortunately, there are a select few self-absorbed players whose innate selfishness results in situations hinted at by Mr. Cancer King. This is really where DMs need to put their foot down.

*sarcastic coughed laughter reading it*
Mean amusing comment in this one for the few, though the pair asked a dm about inactive guild leaders and active members, all got in reply was pretty much ' between you and the guild leader dm's can't/want get involved.' was then threatened practically when a hdm did finally get involved.

Blackman D wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:48 pm

Azure wrote: ↑Thu Nov 14, 2019 11:05 pm Take the reigns, in a respectful and accommodating manner, and dedicate yourself to pushing things forward with responsible role-play.

just wanted to reiterate the respectful part since just trying to take something with members of the guild still playing and especially when you are not in said guild is a hostile takeover and doesnt go well

Yeah, but hostile takeovers IC almost never go well. No matter how active they are or even inactive. They don't go well for anyone if anything history ash to show us. Your best bet is to just do something OOC.

There are systems in place that protect guild leaders, bad systems at times as it spells drama anytime you try. Much like with assassination, your basically shooting yourself in the foot if you try. There's nothing fluid about it IC.

ooc hostile takeovers are much worse than ic, tho ic is bad as well

ooc works well when no one is playing and you are trying to resurrect a dead guild instead of a starting another one that is just like it

We are starting to generalize a bit too much here. The situations of Guilds imploding can be awkward...so I understand not wanting to be too specific.

Yes, bad things happen in certain situations and some situations are worse then others. Great -got it.
Another Pro tip: Good things can happed from bad situations too.

Either way we really need to look at the specific example to really analyze it.
Let's look at mine and original poster here's original situation.

We may then be able to adapt our solution to situations where other guilds are retired with their leader.
So,
I was interested in some Thayan RP at first and so naturally gravitated to The Enclave, like many have done, before me.
The only known RWoT I could recall was Kitteninablenders....who I have not seen in quite awhile.
I posted a thread (of which no existing Red Wizard players commented on) and found out the old leadership of the guild quit playing and took the proverbial 'ball' with them. This gathered from posts of players, that over the last couple of years have tried to get the guild going again.

At this point it becomes very obvious to anyone that cares to observe, that it is very possible to exploit the server rules regarding guild leadership, buy logging on the minumum amount of time yet not actaully play or hand off leadership of the guild.

IIRC, there was bad blood oocly, caused by certain events, between the Red Wizards some other players on the server and some DMs. Old melodrama not worthy of dredging up.... and quite a while ago too. There are still some headed exchanges on posts on this forum, from the not so distant past, between the RW's themselves. In one situation another Red Wizard who either was kicked out or did not want to join them, was going back and forth with the RW leader at that time. You could tell they were livid at each other, yet still trying to convince each other they were laughing. It was a good read, I recommend it.

But I can only purely speculate here, that in the spirit of this bad blood, the 6 month leadership rule could be exploited, to make the DMs look bad and to spite the players on the server. Often people cheat or hack games to accomplish just this task. Relatively common.

Has anyone seen a Red wizard RPing The Enclave Guild recently?

I have not seen anything in years I think...1 or two at least. I have seen red wizards but nothing from this guild. Well over 6 months.
Maybe the rule should be, there has to be guild activity in the last 6 months not just player activity. Some visable sign that the leader is advancing/promoting the goals of the faction in question.
Maybe make within 2-3 months.
No guild activity in 3 months. New player wishing to take over? The existing players/leaders must plan a guild meeting in 7 days, or the guild switches hands.
There, done. Your welcome. Happy to help. My bill is in the mail.

It is absurd to think the server has two available character classes devoted to a nation who's main base in the region (all canon based) is locked off by a mere player and that the Admin are helpless to do anything about it.
Just seems so lame I can not beleive it to be true.
There has to be more to it than that. A conspiracy. Thay is hollow...no flat! Thay doesnt actually exist?!
Okay, rant over.

Solution time. (I can not remember if someone already suggested it somewhere- if so, thanks for letting me steal your idea and be brandished "The Hero of The Internets", in your stead)

In these situations where there is a guild based on server lore, and it has gone dead, the solution is to RP the transition to new leaders over a period of time.
Have players who are interested in taking over, show thier interest, by RPing 'an investigation' into what is going wrong with the guild.
Make forum posts.
Get a DM to referee decisions.
Turn lemons into lemonade.
This will give the existing players fair time to get back into the game. If they don't -then through the natural course of the investigation, a solution gets made and leadership is transferred, all fair and legit. This could be a violent revolt, a silent coup, a democratic election, or just plain old squatters rights.
But its all done in game.
That said:
Before my red wizard begins his investigation, what is the forum name and character name of the current Red Wizards of Thay, Enclaves current Kharzark?
Send me a PM if you do not want to post it here....if there is to be some sort of shame, and we have to now protect the names of the "parties involved" heheh.