from help title:
4. Titles can be a maximum of two words long;
2. Titles should reflect your Association status/rank, etc., not personal
accomplishments. Titles of that sort are reserved for Level 50 titles.
8. Titles can not reflect real world ranks such as ArchBishop, Queen, King, etc.;
few things. on rule 4, does the word "of" count as a word? so for example, "shadow mistress" vs "mistress of shadows" how about "the green machine" vs "green machine"
rules 2 and 8... so your association titles must reflect your guild status or rank but you can't use any real world ranks. so soldier, sergeant, captain, prince are no go? how about warlord, chief, czar? initiate, neophyte? could someone post some examples of what would be allowed, or clarify what isnt allowed? i basically understand the distinction of level 50 titles, but im not at all sure how to make a guild title that fits both rule 2 and rule 8.
association titles
-
Ilshadrial
- Sojourner
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: Atlanta
- Contact:
-
Baikalisan
- Sojourner
- Posts: 314
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 5:01 am
- Contact:
Wasnt a story required if you wanted a personal title outside a guild environment?
Say i wasn't in a guild and wanted a title then i'd have to write a story for it, and in a guild you only had to write a description for yourself? I could be wrong i never bothered to join a guild on Toril, was too much of a hassle with time constraints, so im not all that famaliar with it..
Say i wasn't in a guild and wanted a title then i'd have to write a story for it, and in a guild you only had to write a description for yourself? I could be wrong i never bothered to join a guild on Toril, was too much of a hassle with time constraints, so im not all that famaliar with it..
-
Baikalisan
- Sojourner
- Posts: 314
- Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2001 5:01 am
- Contact:
-
Ilshadrial
- Sojourner
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
- Location: Atlanta
- Contact:
The guild title system: level 50 and role-play story went in, before the first guild was formed.
Guilds were set-up whereas only the founders could have unique titles, but also had to supply story.
The other members titles were set by the guild rank system.
Soj2 was handled the same way with a little more relaxed rules.
Poor Waelos and his title "Scion"
Heh!
Guilds were set-up whereas only the founders could have unique titles, but also had to supply story.
The other members titles were set by the guild rank system.
Soj2 was handled the same way with a little more relaxed rules.
Poor Waelos and his title "Scion"
Heh!
You know... I am trying to keep my nose out of these title rants, but I need to point out one simple thing.
This is Sojourn THREE. Not Sojourn TWO, nor Sojourn ONE, nor TORIL. Trying to hold people to the same standards is ridiculous, and frankly, I am rather disappointed at some of the attitudes of people in these threads when they almost always fall back on the 'back in the old days'.
This isn't the old days. They are dead and gone. Good memories. But this is now, and that was then. Please try to seperate the two.
This is Sojourn THREE. Not Sojourn TWO, nor Sojourn ONE, nor TORIL. Trying to hold people to the same standards is ridiculous, and frankly, I am rather disappointed at some of the attitudes of people in these threads when they almost always fall back on the 'back in the old days'.
This isn't the old days. They are dead and gone. Good memories. But this is now, and that was then. Please try to seperate the two.
Oh, and for the record:
My statement does not reflect my opinions on any of the titles. It was a viewpoint that people are using this counterpoint far too much lately.
If you want my honest opinion on titles:
Some of them are lame, but it's their choice, and not mine. I don't own them or control them. If they like it and have fun, so be it. If I wanted to be a title policeman, I would apply for a god spot and then take it out with authority. Obviously, since that isn't happening, I ignore them and try to have fun, being that this is a game, and I can't control the entire thing, so I let it go.
[This message has been edited by Malacar (edited 04-05-2002).]
My statement does not reflect my opinions on any of the titles. It was a viewpoint that people are using this counterpoint far too much lately.
If you want my honest opinion on titles:
Some of them are lame, but it's their choice, and not mine. I don't own them or control them. If they like it and have fun, so be it. If I wanted to be a title policeman, I would apply for a god spot and then take it out with authority. Obviously, since that isn't happening, I ignore them and try to have fun, being that this is a game, and I can't control the entire thing, so I let it go.
[This message has been edited by Malacar (edited 04-05-2002).]
Wow Malacar, you're right. Here I've been basing my decision that effect my future based on my experiences in my past. How silly of me.
If you paid to see Start Wars II and it turned out to be a move about the trials and errors of a group of twenty somethings trying to live together in New York you shouldn't be disappointed because hey, its Star Wars II not Star Wars I. Tying to hold the second move to the standards of the first is ridiculous, isn't it?
This mud IS based of is predecessors. The new version of the mud is trying to keep those qualities of the previous versions that were 'good' and eliminate those qualities that were 'bad'. The debate here is which qualities are 'good' and which were 'bad'. In order to debate this you MUST refer to the past incarnations of the mud.
You want to separate this mud from the previous one? I say you cannot.
------------------
Rausrh licks you.
If you paid to see Start Wars II and it turned out to be a move about the trials and errors of a group of twenty somethings trying to live together in New York you shouldn't be disappointed because hey, its Star Wars II not Star Wars I. Tying to hold the second move to the standards of the first is ridiculous, isn't it?
This mud IS based of is predecessors. The new version of the mud is trying to keep those qualities of the previous versions that were 'good' and eliminate those qualities that were 'bad'. The debate here is which qualities are 'good' and which were 'bad'. In order to debate this you MUST refer to the past incarnations of the mud.
You want to separate this mud from the previous one? I say you cannot.
------------------
Rausrh licks you.
I agree, but only to a certain extent. And that extent is that if you dwell in the past, without bothering to embrace change and the present or future, you're trapped.
My point was that some(not all) people are bitching about the old, and not offering up any alternatives... Only bitching. I am guilty of this myself from time to time, but in this topic, people are trying to overstep their bounds and really blast people for stuff they have no control over. I've seen no constructiveness in some posts, just hostility and an open license to flame. That is not constructive.
Oh and in the future, try to leave some of the sarcasm out of your post. You'll get your point across much better, and without adverse reaction. I didn't even bother to read your middle paragraph, because the entire post started off kinda silly. I admit you have a point, but keep it on the up and up, eh?
[This message has been edited by Malacar (edited 04-05-2002).]
My point was that some(not all) people are bitching about the old, and not offering up any alternatives... Only bitching. I am guilty of this myself from time to time, but in this topic, people are trying to overstep their bounds and really blast people for stuff they have no control over. I've seen no constructiveness in some posts, just hostility and an open license to flame. That is not constructive.
Oh and in the future, try to leave some of the sarcasm out of your post. You'll get your point across much better, and without adverse reaction. I didn't even bother to read your middle paragraph, because the entire post started off kinda silly. I admit you have a point, but keep it on the up and up, eh?
[This message has been edited by Malacar (edited 04-05-2002).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Malacar:
If you wanted the completely same mud, why did you?</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
::blink::
I honestly can't believe you just went the same route as "I know you are, but what am I?" Heh, that's funny.
How could it be ridiculous for Sojourn to attempt to maintain the same high standards it has had in the past? I can certainly see relaxing them some, because the enforcement of past standards was a little harsh, but not to completely discount them.
If you wanted the completely same mud, why did you?</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
::blink::
I honestly can't believe you just went the same route as "I know you are, but what am I?" Heh, that's funny.
How could it be ridiculous for Sojourn to attempt to maintain the same high standards it has had in the past? I can certainly see relaxing them some, because the enforcement of past standards was a little harsh, but not to completely discount them.
The gods are trying to make Soj3 with -minimal- interfearance into mortal affairs. In doing so, they've made it much easier for people to group and form guilds and stuff.
At the same time, you get some of the odd titles. However, I'd rather not go back to some of the old insanely strict stuff that was her ein the past.. the atmosphere is a lot more relaxed here, and it contributes to more playing fun. Now we just have to work on pulling up the RP
At the same time, you get some of the odd titles. However, I'd rather not go back to some of the old insanely strict stuff that was her ein the past.. the atmosphere is a lot more relaxed here, and it contributes to more playing fun. Now we just have to work on pulling up the RP
-
Guest
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by kiryan:
<B>from help title:
4. Titles can be a maximum of two words long;
2. Titles should reflect your Association status/rank, etc., not personal
accomplishments. Titles of that sort are reserved for Level 50 titles.
8. Titles can not reflect real world ranks such as ArchBishop, Queen, King, etc.;
few things. on rule 4, does the word "of" count as a word? so for example, "shadow mistress" vs "mistress of shadows" how about "the green machine" vs "green machine"</B>
Two words. We thought that was fairly obvious. "of" is still a word.
rules 2 and 8... so your association titles must reflect your guild status or rank but you can't use any real world ranks. so soldier, sergeant, captain, prince are no go? how about warlord, chief, czar? initiate, neophyte? could someone post some examples of what would be allowed, or clarify what isnt allowed? i basically understand the distinction of level 50 titles, but im not at all sure how to make a guild title that fits both rule 2 and rule 8. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Soldier, Sergeant, Captain, Warlord, Chief, Initiate, Neophyte are all fine. They are within the rank of your guild and symbolize your status. Guilds typically (and won't here) have a "Queen". They also don't (and won't here) have a King. Guilds also (get the idea yet?) don't and won't have an ArchBishop. The distinctions are fairly obvious as to what would be an acceptable title in a guild and what is a title that is basically just pretentious.
O, and just so it's posted now since I am sure someone will ask, here is what happens when you are a Level 50 AND a member of a guild. You can combine the two. So yes, the two word limit doesn't apply to Level 50s who have written a story to get their title. However, it is still subject to my approval as to whether or not the title will be allowed.
Erevan
P.S. I apologize if I come off a bit harsh, but getting kind of sick of the people who want to nitpick every little thing instead of simply trying to work within the system. Also, if you have a specific question, ask us. We don't bite. That's what the petition channel is for and I personally don't even mind tells.
[This message has been edited by Erevan (edited 04-05-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Erevan (edited 04-05-2002).]
<B>from help title:
4. Titles can be a maximum of two words long;
2. Titles should reflect your Association status/rank, etc., not personal
accomplishments. Titles of that sort are reserved for Level 50 titles.
8. Titles can not reflect real world ranks such as ArchBishop, Queen, King, etc.;
few things. on rule 4, does the word "of" count as a word? so for example, "shadow mistress" vs "mistress of shadows" how about "the green machine" vs "green machine"</B>
Two words. We thought that was fairly obvious. "of" is still a word.
rules 2 and 8... so your association titles must reflect your guild status or rank but you can't use any real world ranks. so soldier, sergeant, captain, prince are no go? how about warlord, chief, czar? initiate, neophyte? could someone post some examples of what would be allowed, or clarify what isnt allowed? i basically understand the distinction of level 50 titles, but im not at all sure how to make a guild title that fits both rule 2 and rule 8. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Soldier, Sergeant, Captain, Warlord, Chief, Initiate, Neophyte are all fine. They are within the rank of your guild and symbolize your status. Guilds typically (and won't here) have a "Queen". They also don't (and won't here) have a King. Guilds also (get the idea yet?) don't and won't have an ArchBishop. The distinctions are fairly obvious as to what would be an acceptable title in a guild and what is a title that is basically just pretentious.
O, and just so it's posted now since I am sure someone will ask, here is what happens when you are a Level 50 AND a member of a guild. You can combine the two. So yes, the two word limit doesn't apply to Level 50s who have written a story to get their title. However, it is still subject to my approval as to whether or not the title will be allowed.
Erevan
P.S. I apologize if I come off a bit harsh, but getting kind of sick of the people who want to nitpick every little thing instead of simply trying to work within the system. Also, if you have a specific question, ask us. We don't bite. That's what the petition channel is for and I personally don't even mind tells.
[This message has been edited by Erevan (edited 04-05-2002).]
[This message has been edited by Erevan (edited 04-05-2002).]
-
Guest
Comment: I like the idea of having the ability to combine the level 50 title and guild title, Erevan.
Question: what exactly is status/rank? Since only 7 can be officers and the rest are members, does that mean every member must share the same title? Or every member of the same class must share the same title?
Sidenote: Malacar, this is one of those posts where you offer nothing constructive only criticism. Sojourn1 and Sojourn2 and Toril were the basis of Sojourn3 so they do have quite a bit of relevance. To say the contrary would be akin to stating grade school mathematics has no relevance to high school algebra. It most certainly does.
Dornax
Jurdex
Question: what exactly is status/rank? Since only 7 can be officers and the rest are members, does that mean every member must share the same title? Or every member of the same class must share the same title?
Sidenote: Malacar, this is one of those posts where you offer nothing constructive only criticism. Sojourn1 and Sojourn2 and Toril were the basis of Sojourn3 so they do have quite a bit of relevance. To say the contrary would be akin to stating grade school mathematics has no relevance to high school algebra. It most certainly does.
Dornax
Jurdex
You know... Not every post needs to offer ideas. Point in fact, Dornax, yours does not either.
Yes, they might have relevance. But keeping those as the primary reason you want something isn't evolution. It's stagnation.
And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop trying to take inventory of my posts. Frankly, if I wanted a school teacher to correct my essays and homework, I would ask for it.
Yes, they might have relevance. But keeping those as the primary reason you want something isn't evolution. It's stagnation.
And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop trying to take inventory of my posts. Frankly, if I wanted a school teacher to correct my essays and homework, I would ask for it.
-
Guest
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jurdex:
<B>Question: what exactly is status/rank? Since only 7 can be officers and the rest are members, does that mean every member must share the same title? Or every member of the same class must share the same title?
Dornax
Jurdex</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Status/rank means only that it should refer to what you do for the guild/in the guild. It is not narrowly construed, but is meant to try to focus people more on tying their names into what they do for the guild. Guilds don't have ArchBishops. They don't have Kings. 2 and 8 from the help file are fairly closely tied together in their meaning. I can't think of one off hand that doesn't fit, except maybe something like Raven of Wisdom, which is your title. It really doesn't have anything to do with the guild, but maybe you have an explanation for it. Also your a 50, and you have posts in story area. So there are the exceptions in your case why it is allowed. Guild titles are still going to be more of a case by case basis, but we wanted to set out some specific rules so people can make their own changes first.
Erevan
<B>Question: what exactly is status/rank? Since only 7 can be officers and the rest are members, does that mean every member must share the same title? Or every member of the same class must share the same title?
Dornax
Jurdex</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Status/rank means only that it should refer to what you do for the guild/in the guild. It is not narrowly construed, but is meant to try to focus people more on tying their names into what they do for the guild. Guilds don't have ArchBishops. They don't have Kings. 2 and 8 from the help file are fairly closely tied together in their meaning. I can't think of one off hand that doesn't fit, except maybe something like Raven of Wisdom, which is your title. It really doesn't have anything to do with the guild, but maybe you have an explanation for it. Also your a 50, and you have posts in story area. So there are the exceptions in your case why it is allowed. Guild titles are still going to be more of a case by case basis, but we wanted to set out some specific rules so people can make their own changes first.
Erevan
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jurdex:
<B>
Sidenote: Malacar, this is one of those posts where you offer nothing constructive only criticism. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I suppose the implication is that it wasn't 'constructive criticism.'
Corth
<B>
Sidenote: Malacar, this is one of those posts where you offer nothing constructive only criticism. </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I suppose the implication is that it wasn't 'constructive criticism.'
Corth
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I can't think of one off hand that doesn't fit, except maybe something like Raven of Wisdom, which is your title. It really doesn't have anything to do with the guild, but maybe you have an explanation for it. Also your a 50, and you have posts in story area. So there are the exceptions in your case why it is allowed. </font>
If you read the story regarding my title you will see it has quite a bit to do with my guild.
And Malacar, my post was asking for clarification of a rule. As far as taking inventory of your posts, I don't. Its impossible to read the bbs and not stumble across your posts. :P
Dornax
Jurdex
-
kiryan
- Sojourner
- Posts: 7275
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
- Contact:
first, lets stop calling associations guilds. yea i call them guilds for ease, but there is a distinction, guilds are associations with a narrow focus. if associations were mis labeled as guilds then lets change it. here are some sample definitions.
association:
An organized body of people who have an interest, activity, or purpose in common; a society
guild
1. An association of persons of the same trade or pursuits, formed to protect mutual interests and maintain standards.
2. A similar association, as of merchants or artisans, in medieval times
now it seems to me that you could easily have an association with a queen. you could also have a personal title as queen. ive got a friend we call "queen b" (as in bitch). How many fathers call their daughters "princess"? As the leader of an army you could easily assume the title as king/queen. how did queens and kings become kings and queens? they raised an army and took over someone else's property i.e. made themselves queen/king. I understand where your coming from with pretentious, but i sure as hell am not nit picking the rules. every member of your guild shouldnt be a queen, but the leader should be able to be the queen, archbishop, lord, or whatever. queen is no different than captain cept in your opinion. im hoping you can see that and consider relaxing rule #8.
Also, on nitpicking the rules rather than trying to work within them. im not interested in picking something or writing a story for a title and have you get all up in my ass over it and nitpick it to death or flat out deny it. I also have an extensive storyboard for my guild that revolves a concept that would be rejected on the grounds of rule 8. so please excuse me if i nitpick over rules in a sincere effort to #1 get them changed and #2 obey them to the letter.
Also, why do this in tells or over petition? why not handle it all in the same place and tell anyone that asks you to go look at the web for clarification on what is and isnt allowed and why.
for me what this all comes down to is i picked a title for my wife, dark queen, and ive been brainstorming stories for her and i, and ive got a pretty extensive story line setup that ive been brainstorming for the last 6 months. im not interested in redoing it. i think her position as leader of "Seething Darkness" makes her title appropriate. As for the Takhisis / tiamat reference, that was completely unintentional and i make no connection with either in the story line. Id hope that Dark Queen could still be allowed but things like "The Dark Queen" or "Queen of Darkness" be dis-allowed on the grounds that the first is ambigious and relatively unpretentious where as the second and third indicate an authentic well known figure.
[This message has been edited by kiryan (edited 04-06-2002).]
association:
An organized body of people who have an interest, activity, or purpose in common; a society
guild
1. An association of persons of the same trade or pursuits, formed to protect mutual interests and maintain standards.
2. A similar association, as of merchants or artisans, in medieval times
now it seems to me that you could easily have an association with a queen. you could also have a personal title as queen. ive got a friend we call "queen b" (as in bitch). How many fathers call their daughters "princess"? As the leader of an army you could easily assume the title as king/queen. how did queens and kings become kings and queens? they raised an army and took over someone else's property i.e. made themselves queen/king. I understand where your coming from with pretentious, but i sure as hell am not nit picking the rules. every member of your guild shouldnt be a queen, but the leader should be able to be the queen, archbishop, lord, or whatever. queen is no different than captain cept in your opinion. im hoping you can see that and consider relaxing rule #8.
Also, on nitpicking the rules rather than trying to work within them. im not interested in picking something or writing a story for a title and have you get all up in my ass over it and nitpick it to death or flat out deny it. I also have an extensive storyboard for my guild that revolves a concept that would be rejected on the grounds of rule 8. so please excuse me if i nitpick over rules in a sincere effort to #1 get them changed and #2 obey them to the letter.
Also, why do this in tells or over petition? why not handle it all in the same place and tell anyone that asks you to go look at the web for clarification on what is and isnt allowed and why.
for me what this all comes down to is i picked a title for my wife, dark queen, and ive been brainstorming stories for her and i, and ive got a pretty extensive story line setup that ive been brainstorming for the last 6 months. im not interested in redoing it. i think her position as leader of "Seething Darkness" makes her title appropriate. As for the Takhisis / tiamat reference, that was completely unintentional and i make no connection with either in the story line. Id hope that Dark Queen could still be allowed but things like "The Dark Queen" or "Queen of Darkness" be dis-allowed on the grounds that the first is ambigious and relatively unpretentious where as the second and third indicate an authentic well known figure.
[This message has been edited by kiryan (edited 04-06-2002).]
Why, Malacar, how is it that you still inhabit the same body, use the same name, and speak with the same proficiency in English as you did yesterday?
Hmm...
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Malacar:
But keeping those as the primary reason you want something isn't evolution. It's stagnation. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Kiryan has a point, but I propose taking it further. Let people title themselves anything they want. Self-appointed monarchs will see random-load assassination attempts on their persons; the violently insane will have random load mobs that attempt to tie them up "for their own protection", etc.
It could be fun.
[This message has been edited by moritheil (edited 04-06-2002).]
Hmm...
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Malacar:
But keeping those as the primary reason you want something isn't evolution. It's stagnation. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Kiryan has a point, but I propose taking it further. Let people title themselves anything they want. Self-appointed monarchs will see random-load assassination attempts on their persons; the violently insane will have random load mobs that attempt to tie them up "for their own protection", etc.
It could be fun.
[This message has been edited by moritheil (edited 04-06-2002).]
-
kiryan
- Sojourner
- Posts: 7275
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
- Contact:
my point is that a guild could RP wise represent several thousand people while only 30 of the noteworthies interact with the players. It could also represent a royal court of some un-named place. Shadows of Imphras references the kingdom of Imphras cept they styled themselves as agents.
Anyhow my question for erevan is rule 8 flexible or simply no?
Anyhow my question for erevan is rule 8 flexible or simply no?
man i miss the level 50 title stories of old .. i'd love it if you would post yours
in particular (first to my mind anyway) good ones were
Nilan (his is the BEST ever, but posted)
yasden (yes Targsk i DO love ya!)
raner
hrrm post them in the stories section please??? i'd also love to ask berronar if she kept any that she thought were really good??
-Ambar Squish Squid/Shalia Prowlingwolf of old
in particular (first to my mind anyway) good ones were
Nilan (his is the BEST ever, but posted)
yasden (yes Targsk i DO love ya!)
raner
hrrm post them in the stories section please??? i'd also love to ask berronar if she kept any that she thought were really good??
-Ambar Squish Squid/Shalia Prowlingwolf of old
It should also be noted that the Imphras that united a variety of good and evil people has been dead for a while. It's the ideals more than the nation of Impultir that's important to the backstory of the assocation. And yes, our info does need to be redone sometime, we know.
------------------
"Maybe I should stop and ask for directions . . ."
------------------
"Maybe I should stop and ask for directions . . ."
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Erevan:
<B> ... Guilds don't have ArchBishops. They don't have Kings. ...
Erevan</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
hey, as former King, im gonna hafta go ahead n disagree wif ju there mang
Cullen ex-KING
<B> ... Guilds don't have ArchBishops. They don't have Kings. ...
Erevan</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
hey, as former King, im gonna hafta go ahead n disagree wif ju there mang
Cullen ex-KING
Return to “S3 Gameplay Discussion Archive”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests