Author Topic: In regards to GE changes  (Read 1573 times)

King Pickle

  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #25 on: August 08, 2022, 11:49:32 AM »
I was a little surprised at the LG decision, personally. I would have gone with TN just because of how easily manipulated all those faiths have always been to suit the ends of the individual. That being why you see so many good, evil, lawful and chaotic things done in the name of the same religion/s, even by clergy.

It is important to remember that these are not the Real World Earth's religions, even if they share many of the same details. They are still setting specific, and this was based off of the language used in the source material for them.

Wasn't this decision made precisely not to offend some real world religions?

Holgard

  • Outlander
  • **
  • Posts: 97
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #26 on: August 08, 2022, 12:21:02 PM »
Sometimes things happen and change, that can deeply affect a character. However, it seems like these changes are for the better over all. If you're playing a character that has been around for years and these changes are causing a head ache, maybe retire the character and begin anew within the new parameters of the mask of the red death setting. Or if you don't feel like retiring maybe reach out to a DM to see if they could help closure the character in a way that makes sense with the new changes.

Personally I don't see "Just play a new character." Or "Closure your character." to be good advice. Especially when said characters have years of story contribution, development, and time in the server / setting.

Famous Seamus

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #27 on: August 08, 2022, 12:28:54 PM »
Sometimes things happen and change, that can deeply affect a character. However, it seems like these changes are for the better over all. If you're playing a character that has been around for years and these changes are causing a head ache, maybe retire the character and begin anew within the new parameters of the mask of the red death setting. Or if you don't feel like retiring maybe reach out to a DM to see if they could help closure the character in a way that makes sense with the new changes.

I want to begin by acknowledging the good faith and good intentions with which you're making this suggestion. That's seen and appreciated.

Recognizing that, what the suggestion appears to be is, "If you don't like it, quit." Granted, it leaves room to find a satisfying way to quit with DM help, but "just quit playing that character" is the general theme. I mean this totally respectfully, but that isn't properly a solution.

The matter at hand isn't that the changes were made. While opening posts vary in the extent to which they aim for allowance for existing characters, at the very least, the aim is to ask for grandfathering those few existing characters--across all Abrahamic religions--at least in domains so that they can continue on as they were without having large parts of their character or RP invalidated.

Furthermore, I was originally personally guaranteed that all existing GE/MotRD clerics were going to be grandfathered, only for that to be rescinded a few days later.

Last week, the Team contacted me and invited me/the Christian faction to participate in an information-gathering activity on existing cleric domains. There was an understanding that this was for information-gathering purposes only and that any information submitted wouldn't guarantee that those domains would make it onto the revised list. When I asked about a deadline, I was told there wasn't one and that there was no rush. I notified the Team's representative that we'd begun collecting information and that I aimed to have information supplied this week.

The representative also guaranteed (with the words, "rest assured," if memory serves) that no existing GE/MotRD cleric would be required to re-spec in light of the changes.

This weekend, I receive another message that the guarantee was declined at large and will no longer be offered. At around the same time, I noticed that the resources forum threads were being updated, and the announcement was released shortly thereafter.

I don't mean to play this card, but I missed part of work to try to gather information at the Team's request. I get that things sometimes move quickly and there isn't always time to inform people, but to be asked to participate in something, to be guaranteed something, to put your own life on hold to try to participate in good faith (and told there was no deadline, no less), and then to have that guarantee changed and that offer to participate skipped over at the drop of a hat is extremely discouraging.

I'm not pointing fingers, and I'm not trying to put anyone on blast. (As I said above, I appreciate the Team even contacting us at all.) I'm not contesting the changes at large, and I'm not asking that they be rolled back. I'm not asking that any and all new GE/MotRD characters be given free rein to choose whatever they want.

I'm just hoping and asking that some degree of courtesy and allowance can be extended to the current players who are affected by this change--and to those of us who have rearranged RL schedules trying to work on accommodating this.


Mailbox-2100

  • Heir of the
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 982
  • "Maudlyn" Argali Dupont, Lazula Zhuelke, and more
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #28 on: August 08, 2022, 12:30:08 PM »

 Grandfather them, at least. Everything else is. Why is this different? These changes affect me not at all (apart from Christianity being lumped into some unholy trinity with two vastly different religions: Jesus is the Christian messiah, Jews reject Jesus, and Muslims claim Muhammed- but I don't expect a degree in divinities from anyone). Since I don't play a divine-caster, I feel this helps me get rid of those offshoot representations, frankly. So in a round about fashion I benefit. However, why are offended characters not grandfathered like so many other ridiculous things? Send them off with some dignity, idk.

 I could make a list of some ridiculous grandfathered articles if fashionable?

Purist

  • Red Academy
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 2277
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #29 on: August 08, 2022, 12:46:27 PM »
What is the official statement that denies the "Grandfathering" of the affected characters? I am, sadly, seeing an unfortunate repetition of what happened to Hazlan when the domain went through a review and much needed and thanked for changes to make things more legit in regards to the setting. While Hazlan advanced forth in a leap, it kind of crash-landed in the end, just because most of the characters that made the domain alive where overnight denied their place within the established society and server history. Hazlan advanced, I love the new additions, but it has not yet recovered from the Grand Upheavel that shook and collapsed what was flourishing prior to the changes. My humble experience and observation points to the fact that the characters were not grandfathered, as it was initially meant to happen. Now the same thing happens with another niche of players that had built something. Dont take my words as an opposition to change, the thing is that change when it's done through a hard filter like these two examples, only serve to take one step forward and two steps back. I might be wrong, though, maybe in some days, weeks, months or even years things will go back to where they were (Take Hazlan as an example). I am not affected by this change, but I must not sympathize with something that is clearly unfair. Why did this change happen? Everything was going fine, everybody was progressing their stories. Its just sour to derail everyone thet was on board of the GE train.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2022, 12:48:47 PM by Purist »

FinalHeaven

  • Ba'al Verzi
  • The Underworld
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1796
  • dat boi
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #30 on: August 08, 2022, 12:51:41 PM »
I wanted to add that despite my particular viewpoint on how Alignment works or is portrayed in-game I do think that the current handful of characters that this most effects could have been and likely should have been grandfathered in, particularly if they were indeed given some assurances behind the scenes. 

Even if they weren't, this does really remind me of how things were handled with the Red Academy changes and I don't really think that whole ordeal was a good way to go about things, so even if I support the general idea of what these changes seek to accomplish I think it could have been rolled out more smoothly.

Some characters are obviously going to be affected more than others.  I do think that it's probably worth accepting the free remake if necessary and getting in-game to roleplay with your compatriots and just give it a feel.  Everyone roleplays differently but I do think such concepts as the "healer" or the "guardian" can still be maintained even with Domain shifts.



JustMonika

  • Society of the Erudite
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1886
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #31 on: August 08, 2022, 12:51:47 PM »
This seems like an excellent time for a mediation between the Dev team and or representative, and the affected players, and or representative, with the CC mediating.

I'm not sure much will be accomplished through a forum thread, however.

Kireek

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #32 on: August 08, 2022, 12:55:00 PM »
I generally speaking am against grandfathering, it isn't what I consider fair that old players just by the nature of them coming first- get access to something new players can never get access to... ever, period, not even close to it!

HOWEVER- that doesn't mean there shouldn't be no attempt at reconciliation here- a lot of these characters made equipment/build/roleplay decisions predicated on some sort of stability, so at least some sort of concessions should be made to help these characters switch over to the new requirements, whatever they may be, either replacing like for like gear, or maybe a bonus feat here or there to maintain some semblance of character continuity.

Otherwise eh.. I'm frankly in favor of changes that make the GE setting more strictly adhere to a fictional setting tbh. But that's me.

Mailbox-2100

  • Heir of the
  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 982
  • "Maudlyn" Argali Dupont, Lazula Zhuelke, and more
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #33 on: August 08, 2022, 01:03:16 PM »
This seems like an excellent time for a mediation between the Dev team and or representative, and the affected players, and or representative, with the CC mediating.

I'm not sure much will be accomplished through a forum thread, however.

Oh it speaks volumes.

MAB77

  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 6423
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #34 on: August 08, 2022, 02:16:51 PM »
I'd like to put a few details in perspective here.

One. It is I that said that the characters would be grandfathered. I wanted to get a sense of how they'd be impacted, but the info was not readily available at the time. It would not have changed the fact that the revision was coming (see point 3), but I was in error in stating the domains would be grand-fathered. I also reached back to let them know of the situation the moment it was made clear to me that I spoke too soon. This confusion is my fault though and I apologize for it. On that side, the matter is being discussed further at a higher level and I'm sure a decision will be rendered shortly.

Two. No one among the staff is suggesting closing the character and moving on to a new one as the solution. We are adamant on the principle that it is up to a player to decide when to retire a character. It may also be a DM, but that would only happen if said player willingly engaged in a dangerous plot knowing that permanent death to the character is possible.

Three, and this one is very important. The changes are about the Masque of the Red Death setting as a whole. It is a huge mess at this time and a heavy revision is required to address recurring problems caused by the incompatibility of some Masque of the Red Death rules with Ravenloft ones, compounded with the fact that third party sourcebooks contradicting Masque of the Red Death setting were also previously allowed. It just happens that religions is the first clarification we provided, but the work is being done on a much larger scale and more announcements are coming. Though we value the opinions of the community, it is not practical to consult the player base on every issues, especially for changes on that level. In hindsight, I recognize we should just have announced it all at once.

Four. Grand-fathering is not as common as you may think and will be used in precise circumstances only. Exceptions are always best avoided. In the current case, Christianity isn't being discontinued, only the clerical domains are clarified and we have the tools to easily and quickly adjust them on player characters.

Five. JustMonika is right. At this time the best option is for the very few impacted players to engage in mediation with the staff. It's already underway as far as I know.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2022, 02:38:10 PM by MAB77 »
Best Regards!
MAB

Dev. Relationist for the Dark Powers.
1 Castle Road, Castle Ravenloft, Village of Barovia.

Forte

  • The Underworld
  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
  • He is a king whom emperors have served.
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #35 on: August 08, 2022, 02:31:20 PM »
This seems like an excellent time for a mediation between the Dev team and or representative, and the affected players, and or representative, with the CC mediating.

I'm not sure much will be accomplished through a forum thread, however.

If the goal was meditation, then the involved developers should’ve actually kept to their word instead of actively working around the affected players and rescinding or, rather, more accurately ‘reframing’ their word about grandfathering. In another similar case it does nothing but display the growing gap between staff and player; Even with the hands put forth, it’s an incredibly misguided change we’ll call it. If the staff ever thought of clear, concise communication and meditation, they’d have done it in the first place to actively not hurt or affect players who do nothing but add good things to our player environment. For the players involved I can imagine going out of your way to bend over backwards just to kick the pail of someone who does nothing but give good roleplay to most new folk for the past three years of play is a feeling which makes them feel defeated.

I also imagine, while not a catholic in real life myself, I do not want to be categorized in the pitfall of DnD alignments, and especially, in ‘Lawful Good’. I just think this is a very… Odd choice.

Edited for politeness and conciseness.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2022, 02:45:13 PM by Forte »
Dzenifér Uralkodó - HATEFUL

Forte

  • The Underworld
  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
  • He is a king whom emperors have served.
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #36 on: August 08, 2022, 02:38:35 PM »
I'd like to put a few details in perspective here.

One. It is I that said that the characters would be grandfathered. I wanted to get a sense of how they'd be impacting, but the info was not readily available at the time. It would not have changed the fact that the revision was coming (see point 3), but I was in error in stating the domains would be grand-fathered. I also reached back to let them know of the situation the moment it was made clear to me that I spoke too soon. This confusion is my fault though and I apologize for it. On that side, the matter is being discussed further at a higher level and I'm sure a decision will be rendered shortly.

Two. No one among the staff is suggesting closing the character and moving on to a new one as the solution. We are adamant on the principle that it is up to a player to decide when to retire a character. It may also be a DM, but that would only happen if said player willingly engaged in a dangerous plot knowing that permanent death to the character is possible.

Three, and this one is very important. The changes are about the Masque of the Red Death setting as a whole. It is a huge mess at this time and a heavy revision is required to address recurring problems caused by the incompatibility of some Masque of the Red Death rules with Ravenloft ones, compounded with the fact that third party sourcebooks contradicting Masque of the Red Death setting were also previously allowed. It just happens that religions is the first clarification we provided, but the work is being done on a much larger scale and more announcements are coming. Though we value the opinions of the community, it is not practical to consult the player base on every issues, especially for changes on that level. In hindsight, I recognize we should just have announced it all at once.

Four. Grand-fathering is not as common as you may think and will be used in precise circumstances only. Exceptions are always best avoided. In the current case, Christianity isn't being discontinued, only the clerical domains are clarified and we have the tools to easily and quickly adjust them on player characters.

Five. JustMonika is right. At this time the best option is for the very few impacted players to engage in mediation with the staff. It's already underway as far as I know.

If very few impacted players have actually come forth, this not only speaks about how people’s feelings have been hurt enough to not want to even try, or how there’s actively no trust considering that people feel defeated in trying to negotiate terms.

I’ve seen the reaction people have; It’s not one of confidence. While I fully believe in my heart of hearts that was done was intended to help normalize and get things in order with the Red Masque and related setting material, it has ended up only clearly making things more painful for the set of great player involved. Not only should they be apologized to for it, but it should also be worked DIRECTLY with them to ensure those characters are grandfathered.

After all, what would be the point in retroactively going in to actively harm other people’s roleplay with a change? These characters should be respected.

And on your last point not consulting the player base; Perhaps that is why issues like this arise, MAB77.
Dzenifér Uralkodó - HATEFUL

Famous Seamus

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 616
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #37 on: August 08, 2022, 02:58:26 PM »
I'm a bit short on time at the moment, but I'd like to hop in and briefly thank both PrimetheGrime and MAB for taking the time to speak up and open up on some of the subjects being presented here. One of the goals of this thread, as near as I can tell, was to have an open and honest conversation that acknowledges the situation without trying to point fingers.

It's really helpful to see devs stepping in with thoughtful and open comments. Thank you both.


JustMonika

  • Society of the Erudite
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1886
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #38 on: August 08, 2022, 03:02:03 PM »
This is off topic I appreciate, so apologies to the moderation team in advance, but I'd just like to restress Forte, that the points you have raised make it even more the case the proper way to resolve this is via mediation.

I'd also like to stress that there is no real difference between The Staff and The Players all of the CC, and many of the DM and Dev teams are also players. Some of them do so openly, some of them do so under covert usernames, but they're also out there in the same world as you are. They're people just like you.

None of them want anything but the best for this server. Do they make mistakes? Sure. Do I agree with all of their decisions? Definately not. But most of the time with most of the decisions they make there's no 'Everyone Wins' soultion. Hard calls have to be made, and sometimes people will lose out. Could the communication and management of these decisions be handled better? Again, sure.

But we're dealing with a strictly volunteer team of part time hobbists, and frankly there's nothing less fun than spending time telling people bad news. It's hard to write, it's hard to deliver. You don't exactly get many people lining up to deliver it, and you won't get many people willingly engaging in a thread like this to be critised for doing their best. It's just not most peoples idea of a fun way to unwind after a day of work/family.

Disagreements arise, and that's what the CC and the medation process is for. When two sides have a disagreement, even a very strong one, the CC is there to let both parties talk it out in a safe constructive space and work so everyone can leave the situation with a better perspective of how the other feels and how to do better next time.

Circling the wagons and devoloping an us vs them mentality is the exact opposite of something that is going to help either party in the future. Communities can only be built together.

And remember the CC that will be mediating is a player. Just like you. Just like me. They're not on anyones side, they're there to help ensure the best outcome for everyone involved.

It's clear with this particular issue there are people that feel unheard, people who feel wronged, and people who would like to get their point across. A mediated discussion with those parties with whom you want to discuss is the best way to do this.

I promise you, it is worth giving a chance. And if a mediation doesn't work, and you're still unhappy afterwards and don't feel anything has changed? What have you lost by the attempt?

All too often I see bad feelings and distrust generating on PoTM because people won't talk to each other directly. Trust me, the forum isn't the right place to resolve bad feelings, however justified.

I'm delighted to hear from MAB that something to that effect might be going on presently, and I encourage anyone with any concerns to participate with an open mind.

For my own on topic thought, I'd like a general idea of what the big picture is for these other forthcoming GE changes as I think that would put this religion piece into a bit more context.

Forte

  • The Underworld
  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 320
  • He is a king whom emperors have served.
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #39 on: August 08, 2022, 03:23:01 PM »
This is off topic I appreciate, so apologies to the moderation team in advance, but I'd just like to restress Forte, that the points you have raised make it even more the case the proper way to resolve this is via mediation.

I'd also like to stress that there is no real difference between The Staff and The Players all of the CC, and many of the DM and Dev teams are also players. Some of them do so openly, some of them do so under covert usernames, but they're also out there in the same world as you are. They're people just like you.

None of them want anything but the best for this server. Do they make mistakes? Sure. Do I agree with all of their decisions? Definately not. But most of the time with most of the decisions they make there's no 'Everyone Wins' soultion. Hard calls have to be made, and sometimes people will lose out. Could the communication and management of these decisions be handled better? Again, sure.

But we're dealing with a strictly volunteer team of part time hobbists, and frankly there's nothing less fun than spending time telling people bad news. It's hard to write, it's hard to deliver. You don't exactly get many people lining up to deliver it, and you won't get many people willingly engaging in a thread like this to be critised for doing their best. It's just not most peoples idea of a fun way to unwind after a day of work/family.

Disagreements arise, and that's what the CC and the medation process is for. When two sides have a disagreement, even a very strong one, the CC is there to let both parties talk it out in a safe constructive space and work so everyone can leave the situation with a better perspective of how the other feels and how to do better next time.

Circling the wagons and devoloping an us vs them mentality is the exact opposite of something that is going to help either party in the future. Communities can only be built together.

And remember the CC that will be mediating is a player. Just like you. Just like me. They're not on anyones side, they're there to help ensure the best outcome for everyone involved.

It's clear with this particular issue there are people that feel unheard, people who feel wronged, and people who would like to get their point across. A mediated discussion with those parties with whom you want to discuss is the best way to do this.

I promise you, it is worth giving a chance. And if a mediation doesn't work, and you're still unhappy afterwards and don't feel anything has changed? What have you lost by the attempt?

All too often I see bad feelings and distrust generating on PoTM because people won't talk to each other directly. Trust me, the forum isn't the right place to resolve bad feelings, however justified.

I'm delighted to hear from MAB that something to that effect might be going on presently, and I encourage anyone with any concerns to participate with an open mind.

For my own on topic thought, I'd like a general idea of what the big picture is for these other forthcoming GE changes as I think that would put this religion piece into a bit more context.

In a perfect world, this meditation would've been done before pushing a change forth created by a a smaller vocal minority while only half-consulting the related players. My own opinion regarding CC meditation aside, yes, this would be the optimal path taken; I am not disagreeing with that, but rather it simply shows the lack of confidence in at a system considering the otherwise lack of crystal clear communication within this issue alone. As we see with Vandryn, going forward, we can only hope for a better conclusion to this than not. I just think it moderately shortsighted, if not borderline offensive- As he said, while Christianity is not discontinued, it sets a dangerous precedent of categorizing things similar to real life religion far too harshly and making people raise some brows. For me, personally, if my own faith from my native religion was actively being categorized in a similar way and done so without much consulting, I'd be more than just upset about things roleplay wise.

It is good to hear that something, to that effect of course, will be going forward. It is probably the only way to keep the conversation constructive. People are upset, and most of all, it's not that I believe it has to be this perceived us/them argument that you employ; Rather that the divide of communication creates that mentality with players unintentionally, and that is what creates this lack of desire to communicate with one another. That is my thesis regarding it, anyway, and previously recorded situations like this is what builds this confidence in this ideology.

'Hard calls have to be made, and sometimes people will lose out', however, is not the mentality I would expect to be witnessing when trying to make a fun environment for players. Compensation and ensuring the fun of those players should come first, rather than returning the machine back to its well-oiled status quo state. The Red Masque changes can be perfectly good; Helping limit the flux of GE/related characters that very clearly come in to be harmful stereotypes (these usually get banned or reported within a few days) is a grand goal, but if the wider brush to this ends up limiting the roleplayers who contribute much to the server, then I do not think it is a hard call to make. That is, again, merely my own personal thesis on such.

'You don't exactly get many people lining up to deliver it, and you won't get many people willingly engaging in a thread like this to be criticized for doing their best', however, is not a defense I can agree with. Volunteer they are, thankless, they are not. Many of the staff put forth a great appreciated effort to maintaining the integrity of the server, and often times, for the best. However, being a volunteer, no matter what it is, does not exempt someone from being questioned on the validity and actual reception of a change being put forth, especially when it also affects a wider group of players who try and also, funnily enough, volunteer their time to try and add to the setting, just in a different sense than a developer or DM would. That is not a slight, of course, against your own personal view on it- I think for volunteer work what is done here is often very impressive as lesser teams would often crumble underneath many of the workloads involved on PoTM.

However, for this, it is not for the best, which is why I came out of my hideyhole to be vocal regarding it. That being said, my continued posting is no longer necessary- With meditation being found and some talk to happen privately, all we can hope is that people find some without further conflict. It will be for the best.
Dzenifér Uralkodó - HATEFUL

Erikat

  • the last grimalkin
  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
  • The whole of virtue consists in its practice.
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #40 on: August 08, 2022, 03:39:41 PM »
“ Two. No one among the staff is suggesting closing the character and moving on to a new one as the solution. We are adamant on the principle that it is up to a player to decide when to retire a character. It may also be a DM, but that would only happen if said player willingly engaged in a dangerous plot knowing that permanent death to the character is possible.”

Adamant on a principle, but in practice fast and loose with the player bases time and effort. This thread has spoken volumes.
Actives: Alexia Cel-Tradat

Phantasia

  • Stealth/Detection Cognoscenti
  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 1337
  • ż
Re: In regards to GE changes
« Reply #41 on: August 08, 2022, 04:39:20 PM »
All right, I think that's quite enough for the time being. As said, we'll re-open this thread in time once people have had a chance to cool off. I or someone else will make a post when it's open again.

As a developer who voted to attempt to salvage the setting, as we don't like to just outright remove people's scope of creativity, I could have never foreseen such a negative reaction from the community in regards to our efforts. Please keep in mind that no small amount of time was put in re-organizing the source material, cutting out unfitting parts, and bringing it in line with the PnP fantasy setting Gothic Earth/Masque of the Red Death. You have made your voices clear and we have heard you--there is no need to drag this thread down beyond the tame discussion it was.

Yes, a response was made that jumped the gun, and we understand and sympathize with the groups of players and individuals that were negatively affected by a "reversal" in what they were told. The simple fact of the matter is that it was not a full consensus on what we wished to accomplish at the time. I would like to take this opportunity to kindly remind people that unless it is an official announcement that merits its own thread (not a Discord message, PM/DM, etc.), and is also signed by the development team, that it should not be taken as certainty and the final word in the matter.

Thank you for your understanding, and we ask for your patience once again. We are sorry for any upset and disappointment this might have caused.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2022, 04:48:16 PM by Phantasia »
Le cśur voit plus loin que l'esprit.
The heart sees further than the mind.