AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

This might just be my personal bias talking, but I still believe that any language system should also take Lore into account, even if it's only in a minimal sense. Most linguists will actually be bards, simply by the nature of the bard class, but they don't rely on Intelligence for their class features, which means very few will have as high an Intelligence as a wizard, and those who do are almost unfairly cutting down their efficacy. What bards DO have, however, is Lore, even as broad as that skill already is. Frankly I'd be more inclined to believe a high Lore roll from a self-professed linguist than a high INT roll.

I think someone told me Amia's language rule was (Under)Common + Base Race Language + Base INT mod + (1 language per 5 lore).

MY new favorite link!

There's no rule for languages. Some people follow the whole base plus INT mod for starting languages, I do. Most of the time I don't even bother with additional languages, either. But yeah there's no hard rule on it.

Suhjet wrote:

I think someone told me Amia's language rule was (Under)Common + Base Race Language + Base INT mod + (1 language per 5 lore).

It's not a rule. That's my own personal rule of thumb I used when making a thread. It's also for maximum languages learn-able, not like a guarantee of how many languages a PC would know.

Someone even suggested that 5 lore per language might have been a little gracious and 10 per would have been better. I'm inclined to agree, looking back.

Not official, but it's what a DM told me and I like it nonetheless.

The language widget is not an option?

Languages are kinda tough. I feel like what it really will amount to is just exclusionary Rp. I'll take a snippit from a friend on Skype, as we were discussing language dilemmas:

"The fundamental issue is always this: when you say something in a language others don't understand, you exclude them from your RP. Sometimes this is called for and part of the scene, but people resort too lightly to a tool that's offered on a silver platter. It's the same thing as doing things behind closed doors: sometimes you need it and make the effort, but chilling somewhere private for no good reason is kinda harmful to the server's overall activity
The easier we make it, the more it's used and the less people interact."

I thought it was more a mechanical issue of spamming the DM chat channel and the "languages" most language systems output being gibberish anyway.

I don't have any particular want for a language tool, but I'm not sure if I agree with the increased exclusionary RP thing. After all, ideally it's no different that what people already do with the "[Language] ..." method if no one is metagaming. People sit around and have whole conversations in Elven, Draconic, and Hin all the time and you'll have to sit there and cut your eyes away from the text anyway to not pick up on what people are saying and subconsciously change your RP based on it if your PC doesn't speak the language. Messy implication, uncertain rules we'd have to develop, and gibberish languages aside, a language system would at least allow people to go without being "spoiled" on conversations their PC wouldn't understand.

Edit: What I mean to say is that a language tool would lead to no more exclusion than our current method creates.

Suhjet wrote:

I think someone told me Amia's language rule was (Under)Common + Base Race Language + Base INT mod + (1 language per 5 lore).

Lore doesn't figure in, but yes, that's the general rule that's been use dfor over a decade. Common + racials + base int mod.

Coded in languages aren't happening.

Didn't Terra script a sweet language thing?

We had troubles with the language system that are mostly about rules of exclusion. It was decided it will do more harm to the server than good, even though I loved making the languages

bobofwestoregonusa wrote:

Didn't Terra script a sweet language thing?

Yup. May or may not also have caused minor collapses, iirc.

I have a particular issue with language generators and systems. When I hear someone talking in a foreign language, I can still pick up a lot of clues about the touc at hand by their hand movements, the volume, the speed and the pitch they are using. A lot of metalinguistic information if you will about the mechanical message they are conveying.

All of this information is already lost in game because we work with a text format. A lot of players are very eloquent and manage to convey this information by the words used, length of sentences and spacing. So much it rarely ever needs to be supported by emotes describing the language. A language system however would be a double reduction of this metainformation of the other characters mood or intent at the moment. (We might as well be staring at a screen with badly animated figurines

).

A secondary issue is that it does cause some alienation to the player when his character does not speak a language. Before if my character is in the presence of another group speaking a foreign language at least I on arson all level am entertained by something going on (and possible misdirection a to the character). With such a system I think I would get bored and leave. I favour inclusion.

Last edited by Overneath on Wed, Feb 03 2016, 19:56 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Post moved to IA.

How do bonus languages factor into that? Would it be sensible to assume a Cormyrian would know both common and Chondathan (their regional language), then add on extra languages dependent on lore and intelligence?

Dergaii wrote:

A secondary issue is that it does cause some alienation to the player when his character does not speak a language. Before if my character is in the presence of another group speaking a foreign language at least I on arson all level am entertained by something going on (and possible misdirection a to the character). With such a system I think I would get bored and leave. I favour inclusion.

This part is what I hear the most. All RP is not inclusive. It is not supposed to be. My Paladin is excluded from all Lothite RP, he cannot move to the city of Tarkul, and any plots dealing with killing people, raising undead, or even robbing a bank to feed the orphans in Cordor he is not able to partake in. He is completely excluded from those.

This is not something I imagine anyone would say is wrong, I believe almost everyone would say well that is in character. Someone when people mention well that would exclude others. Nercomancers (not Palemasters) tend to be frowned upon and summoning undead or having a Skeleton walking casually alongside you is a huge no no.

Certain cities on the game exclude races (The Dwarf city will not allow in Kobolds and dark elves by default, Kohl will not allow in demons, Underdark will not allow my shape change who was in Drow form to bind there).

These are more RP exclusions. Things which shape and encourage certain RP is not an exclusion it helps shame a setting and theme. Not understanding an language my character does not is not exclusion, it adds to the immersion for me.

Languages are just a non-starter. It just further subdivides the cliques at best, and at worst, it makes it so everyone is being spammed gibberish except your one friend. Since that shit is annoying to see, people will leave hubs, to go to private areas, which is exactly what we do not want to encourage.

Faded Wings wrote:

Languages are just a non-starter. It just further subdivides the cliques at best, and at worst, it makes it so everyone is being spammed gibberish except your one friend. Since that shit is annoying to see, people will leave hubs, to go to private areas, which is exactly what we do not want to encourage.

That comment seems a but disingenuous. What language is so rare which is spoken in a scene only two people know it? Commonly the language I see spoken are the ones which ICly would be used. The worse part about the response is it ignores the counter to your argument. You already exclude a lot of people already. Even in those hubs. How many Palemasters are allowed in the hubs? How about a Nercomancer with their beloved Aunt walking along side of them (who lost a few pounds as her flesh rotted off, but now she is a size 0)? Or all the cities which I just mentioned that banned everyone of X race or in some cases leylines which cannot be bound by certain alignments?

Or at best is the answer we picked certain cities which are the RP winners (hubs) so no system or action will be in place that moves the RP away from these winners to other areas? Because I don't think everyone using code to speak elven in Winya, Undercommon in the Underdark, or Dwarven in the Dwraf city is going to cause everyone to run off to a private House as you suggested.

I wouldn't hang around elves that were filling my chat logs with annoying gibberish. I would straight up go somewhere else. I would, however, remain if there was RP to watch, regardless of if my character actually understood it.

Yesterday I glanced over at the player list and saw that 17 of the 22 people on the server were nobles. The proletariat cannot support an economic or governmental base that's built on a reverse pyramid of bourgeoisie. I would rectify this.

It is beyond farcical.

AirPhforce wrote:

Yesterday I glanced over at the player list and saw that 17 of the 22 people on the server were nobles. The proletariat cannot support an economic or governmental base that's built on a reverse pyramid of bourgeoisie. I would rectify this.

It is beyond farcical.

I'd have to agree we have quite a lot of nobles suddenly.

There was likely a very good reason for an influx of nobles being on the server at once, as it's not such a regular occurrence that it bears any significant mentioning in my opinion.

AirPhforce wrote:

Yesterday I glanced over at the player list and saw that 17 of the 22 people on the server were nobles. The proletariat cannot support an economic or governmental base that's built on a reverse pyramid of bourgeoisie. I would rectify this.

It is beyond farcical.

That analogy assumes that PCs are part of the working class. My bard has more gold pieces in his pocket than most actual Faerunian nobles have in their vaults. Nobility does not equate to ruling class (that would be royalty) insofar as it's merely your caste, which is a different scenario. Adventurers have their own caste and, frankly, they don't answer to anybody. I would assume the several tens of thousands of nameless NPC commoners we don't see more than make up for the perceived imbalance.

There does seem to be a recent influx of the perception that being or creating a noble is the 'hot new thing', but that's a result of the original noble characters earning their titles via blood, sweat, tears and RP. And that's a problem for the players themselves, unless you suggest the DMs start OOCly stripping titles. I suppose the real question here is, are the nobles themselves the issue, or the fact that they have players behind them?

In practice we need a medal of valor or something to simulate gained renown. As it stands, we have probably 3 actual PCs in positions of authority (the rest are run by DMs, for very good reason), and the rest, like most of Kohlingen's Lords and Ladies, have a title instead of a pat on the back for doing...something. I think it was Reyes? I suppose Kohlingen figured it was cheaper to give out noble titles as quest rewards than something useful like a stipend, land, or a magic item. How many votes in Parliament have Tuomas, Ulrik and Hector pa- oh! Right! It's a Theocracy!

Something tells me most of the noble players are just as miffed about the fact that they're essentially still the same people with an extra word in their names as you are about the pinata-like nature of the ceremony, Commie.

Edit: And while we're on the subject, we have far too many hubs and factions. I'm not entirely certain if our playerbase breaches triple digits, but we have 16 specified IC subforums? Amia Forest/Barak Runedar/Bendir Dale/Kohlingen/Winya should all be the same Alliance city with a backyard big enough for the druids, Khem needs to be axed like there have been plans to do for over a year now, the Amian West Coast is functionally limited to Wharftown, or more specifically its single bar, Cordor/Wiltun should be a neutral trade conglomerate and Tarkuul should have taken over Shadowscape, Zanshibon and the Quagmire with help from the Underdark.

Good/Evil/Neutral cities too basic, you say? Looking around, I'm very skeptical that we have the resources to manage anything else. Our playerbase and development staff is built for a much smaller server.

If I could change Amia I'd... add mounts :mrgreen:

I just think it's interesting that we have huge swaths of players with lord and lady before their names and, as far as I can tell, nobody to actually rule. It's so absurd thst entire populations are made up from one or two family lines and there just isn't anyone else there. It's just this huge insular pack of nobles that bounce between cities doing God knows what playing Skyrim meets game of thrones. Then you mention this and next time you pop in game someone blows you up with walls of greenbelt about how every single person earned the right to play their noble character and that's why the ruling lords and ladies don't actually rule anyone: anyone they could rule got bumped up in some plot they ran so fuck you for questioning it.

Meanwhile it's nobles as far as the player list goes. Shits dumb.

The thing that I find curious about all the nobility is that almost no one has any actual titles. You know, like duke/duchess or baron/baroness. Lord/lady are generic terms used to describe any sort of noble, but it's not the actual title itself.

Larsaan wrote:

The thing that I find curious about all the nobility is that almost no one has any actual titles. You know, like duke/duchess or baron/baroness. Lord/lady are generic terms used to describe any sort of noble, but it's not the actual title itself.

That's why its so amusing and stupid at the same time. It's even better when there are ten or more lords and ladies sitting around the dale for hours on end: everyone's king so nobody has anything to do. They used titles to give themselves meaning and because there are so many now they actually ended up being less. A non noble would actually be more unique and special at this point. Thats how bad it is.

Anyway I'm at work. I'll post more fun interactions I've had with the noble faction later.

AirPhforce wrote:

I just think it's interesting that we have huge swaths of players with lord and lady before their names and, as far as I can tell, nobody to actually rule. It's so absurd thst entire populations are made up from one or two family lines and there just isn't anyone else there. It's just this huge insular pack of nobles that bounce between cities doing God knows what playing Skyrim meets game of thrones. Then you mention this and next time you pop in game someone blows you up with walls of greenbelt about how every single person earned the right to play their noble character and that's why the ruling lords and ladies don't actually rule anyone: anyone they could rule got bumped up in some plot they ran so fuck you for questioning it.

Meanwhile it's nobles as far as the player list goes. Shits dumb.

We don't really have a large enough community, or maximum capacity server even, to have a noble character ruling appropriately over a group of PC commoners. Most players make characters in the adventuring class, which is far above the commoner class. There just simply aren't a lot of players that find it appealing to play a poor, uneducated character who spends his day farming, returns home to his wife, cranks a baby out every two years, and dies to illness. That being said, there are in fact noble PC's who do rule over people, but these people are not represented in-game.

Even in the real world, not everyone in the gentry carries a landed title, by the way. A landed title would give them the a population to rule over. But many of the Amian noble characters are unlanded nobility. So they're a part of the upper class without any holding-- be it a village, town, fortress, barony, duchy, jarldom, kingdom-- to rule over. If we also consider that in Kohlingen the Triadic Church is the key player and responsible for its chapels, we can understand why some people would be knighted by the Church, but would not have any land to oversee.

You're making assessments of the player class distribution, but the player distribution isn't at all indicative of the class distribution of NPC's in our world. Is your argument that fellow players in the playerlist should be composed of the same percentage of nobility-to-peasants as it is in-game? If so, why? Players represent a small, unique group of characters that whether noble born, title-given, adventurer class, or even simple commoner possess extraordinary potential and ability. Players characters epitomize being different in our setting.

AirPhforce wrote:

Anyway I'm at work. I'll post more fun interactions I've had with the noble faction later.

Or you know, don't. You're not really winning any favors among your fellow players by being toxic, making terribly uneducated generalizations without seemingly any understanding of feudal nobility, or simply rude remarks about the quality of their roleplay.

Bear in mind, I don't play a noble character. I have, but I don't currently. I don't really have an issue with people feeling like there's too many nobles. But you've taken it a Trump-Step farther and decide to speak down on people's roleplay. Which, mind you, is simply against the rules.

But since you're still fairly new, I'll happily post the reminders here:

Quote:

B2. You cannot expect people to be good roleplayers, or your kind of roleplayer. You can only expect people to try their best, and you should help them to become even better. Take the time to invest in people that want to roleplay, you started once as well.

Quote:

A2. You can expect from players that they have noted the category this server is in, namely "Roleplaying". This means that you are welcome to comment on excessive OOC talking, obvious metagaming, unrealistic behaviour and other things that spoil your roleplay. It does not entitle you to act like a jerk to the offender.

Just relax and chill. There's a way to approach an issue in a constructive fashion, and another way to alienate yourself from the playerbase by shit-throwing. You mention that you get a bunch of hostile tells-- well maybe it's not in what you're saying, but the way you're saying it. There are other people who share the same opinion, but don't get quipped at because they're not being condescending about it.

I'm not knocking anyone. I just believe what I said on my first post about it. Entire cities where everyone is a noble (or 'unlanded' noble apparently, as you explained) is farcical. It's comedic. And I think it's unbelievably silly.

Then again none of my characters even have last names or titles.

That isn't the case, however. There is not a single example of "Entire cities where everyone is a noble." And I would happily point out examples of where you were decrying the quality of Rp from fellow players if you're having trouble recognizing them. Hell, you were about to point out an entire list of sarcastically "fun" encounters with other players (While simultaneously lumping every single noble character into one negatively generalized 'faction', I might add.)

I would enforce forum etiquette and decorum. Tact goes a long way.

Mr. Hackums wrote:

That isn't the case, however. There is not a single example of "Entire cities where everyone is a noble." And I would happily point out examples of where you were decrying the quality of Rp from fellow players if you're having trouble recognizing them.

Dunno where all this rp stuff is coming from I just really think it's funny that we have so many nobles. Thats all. I even linked a funky picture and used funny words. Not everything is a personal attack. Relax.

Quote:

It's just this huge insular pack of nobles that bounce between cities doing God knows what playing Skyrim meets game of thrones

Quote:

It's even better when there are ten or more lords and ladies sitting around the dale for hours on end: everyone's king so nobody has anything to do.

This is where I'm getting it from. I don't think that any of the players mentioned would agree with your negative summary of their roleplay.

But if you say it's all simply in good fun, and that you don't mean any disrespect I'll believe you and drop it. But I think you might want to try a different approach to forum humor, because there's the chance that this kind of stuff gets received as being extremely adversarial and condescending. Just because you're laughing at someone's expense doesn't mean it's funny or warranted, really.

Last edited by Commie on Fri, Feb 05 2016, 23:03 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Well yeah that's the thing. Too many cooks have spoiled the broth. I think there needs to be a noble title culling.

But thats a whole nother issue.

As a player of a noble PC, my response to you is to RP with me before you lump me into some group.

I'm sorry you've been getting Tells like that. Screenshot them and send them to a DM if you really are getting them frequently enough that it's noteworthy.

If I could change Amia, I'd drill it into everyone's heads to report things of this nature: harassment OOC is never acceptable. Too often things go unreported and only thrown on the forums as stuff that happens all the time. Be nice to each other, people! D:

Yeah I'm sorry all. Thats what I should be doing.

AirPhforce wrote:

Well yeah that's the thing. Too many cooks have spoiled the broth. I think there needs to be a noble title culling.

What if someone culled you of your Kobold or your Fey touched because the conclusion was that there were too many on the server? Every single person with a Lady/Lord/Noble title has earned that by hard work and hours upon hours of dedication. You nor anyone else has the right to take that away from them.

Maverick00053 wrote:

AirPhforce wrote:

Well yeah that's the thing. Too many cooks have spoiled the broth. I think there needs to be a noble title culling.

What if someone culled you of your Kobold or your Fey touched because the conclusion was that there were too many on the server? Every single person with a Lady/Lord/Noble title has earned that by hard work and hours upon hours of dedication. You nor anyone else has the right to take that away from them.

Yeah. And if there comes a day where seventy percent of a server is kobolds I'll cull my own character.

> I would make body parts / changes free.
> Add more generic widgets for classes like assassin.
> Do away with arbitrary times or cool downs.
> Offer more leeway with race and Alignment
> Make the Job system better
> Make Mythals more readily available.

I think Jes's point is good, and it's the reason why I ended up like I did.

I know of at least 6 noble characters who are extremely good roleplayers, engaging in and initiating their own incredible plots. Stuff you likely just have no idea about-- and that's okay! It'll be fun to experience it. Just don't write 'em off so quickly as a bad thing for the server just based on their player list name.

Sorry if I came off as being a dick too. Generalizations are just really something that get under my skin. From the sounds of it, you weren't meaning harm by it-- and I also know that you're raising a point a lot of other people have raised too.

Mr. Hackums wrote:

I think Jes's point is good, and it's the reason why I ended up like I did.

I know of at least 6 noble characters who are extremely good roleplayers, engaging in and initiating their own incredible plots. Stuff you likely just have no idea about-- and that's okay! It'll be fun to experience it. Just don't write 'em off so quickly as a bad thing for the server just based on their player list name.

Sorry if I came off as being a dick too. Generalizations are just really something that get under my skin. From the sounds of it, you weren't meaning harm by it-- and I also know that you're raising a point a lot of other people have raised too.

Naw man it's all good. Text is an awful medium because there's no emotion behind the words. Ain't nobody actually a bad RP'er that I've seen so far, and if there was you had better believe I'd call them out on it cause that's how I roll.

This is really is nothing but me seeing a disproportionate amount of nobles on the player list, and I'd think it would look better if all 'unlanded' nobles didn't have "lord" or "lady" before their name, so the big names actually stand out a little more. When I first started playing in December 15 I was really fuckin confused over who the fuck actually ran stuff because there were so many lords and ladies around.

I can see your point about unlanded nobles, but a lot of the nobles we have, are in fact, nobles to actual areas in game. Like, Kohlingen nobles, Wiltun nobles, Cordor nobles, as opposed to say, Cormyr nobles. (no offense intended to my friends who play Cormyr nobles, just an example

) my point is, the majority of our nobles are in fact playing native, and not playing nobles who aren't anywhere near home.

By "unlanded noble", that means one who owns no land or property tied to the title. Most of the nobles I know of on Amia are this. Regardless of them being native, they actually have no "House" and land to go with their title.

I play a noble from Cormyr and she doesn't have a title in her name. The reason being that it was a pivotal part of the character that she earn her own way into her future and her nobility. I wanted her to do something on Amia that was deserving of her actually taking her official title.

As for others, I can't really speak for them. The two nobles I've made were that way for specific reasons and not because I like fancy crap in my name. As a matter of fact, ask me six months ago and I would have said I'd never see myself playing a lady or lord because it wasn't really my flavor. But things change, and stories of any direction or origin---as long as they have interesting depth---are alluring to play. I wouldn't be so quick to judge, though I know it's easy to adopt an opinion without much context and a lot more 'group think'.

I can see your point about unlanded nobles, but a lot of the nobles we have, are in fact, nobles to actual areas in game. Like, Kohlingen nobles, Wiltun nobles, Cordor nobles, as opposed to say, Cormyr nobles. (no offense intended to my friends who play Cormyr nobles, just an example

) my point is, the majority of our nobles are in fact playing native, and not playing nobles who aren't anywhere near home.

Yeah, Goddess! Unlanded nobility means anyone who isn't in charge of a fortress, a manor, a city, town, etc. For instance, a Baron is a landed noble who is in charge of a Barony. A Duke is a noble in charge of a duchy. And these are actually feudal plots of land, territory, or holdings.

For instance (To the best of my knowledge!), in Wiltun most nobles would be considered unlanded-- with the exception of Thane Cory. I don't know if Lord Avadon currently is the liege of any particular holding-- but he's one of the potential/likely successors to the Jarldom of Wiltun. So when/if he acquires the Jarldom, he would then become a landed noble. Viola would be unlanded as well, but because she's a woman in a patriarchal system her best chance of being considered landed would be through marriage to a landed noble.

Similarly, Knights who are anointed by the Triadic temple would be considered gentry, but until they're the liege lord of a chapel, town, fortress, etc they're still unlanded. Even if they're local to the region.

There's very few actually landed nobles. I believe Ser Robert was one, when he had his Barony on Caraigh. Lord Cory, and.. I don't know who else. I suppose the noble elves would be (Given that there's the Durothil Tower, and the Le'Quella house, but it's a much more loose system of feudal governance and Winya is run by a council of elders, so I'm not sure that those homes would count really as holdings). There may also be some landed nobles who possess a holding outside of Amia. Many characters have been awarded gentry titles for deeds throughout the war and before-- and that's not uncommon either.

Then there's also titles inherited by actual PC nobles too. There are two to three such characters in Kohlingen, and I believe both of the holdings (if any) are Rp'd as Estates not represented in game. Which is fine, mind. But it's not uncommon for a noble family to birth many children, and only one child actually being granted land ownership upon succession while the rest are left to be bitter schemers without people to truly command. I think it shouldn't be all that surprising that many nobles in Amia aren't in a role where they're ruling over people.

On that note, I actually think that having more nobles isn't necessarily a bad thing-- but can actually be a good thing.

The way nobility roleplay tends to work is that it's one of these two cases:
1.) One noble interacting with a bunch of non-nobles
2.) Many nobles interacting with each other via gentry politics, status, etc.

House Avadon, for example, possessing numerous nobles within it allows for there to be internal nobility roleplay. And this kind of roleplay is only possible player to player (Not player with DM) if there are enough players actually playing noble characters.

I think that it might be fair to say that there are some concerns that nobility is being watered down. Instead of suggesting that we try to put a limit on nobility, I think everyone would be better off if DM's and players alike tried to imbue more meaning into the titles through plotwork.

Political plotlines/involvement are a kind of responsibility among noble characters, in my opinion. If the nobility scene, especially with NPC's, can become more organic and dynamic, then we might all be able to find more purpose in the large number of noble characters.

SamTheGiantSlayer wrote:

I play a noble from Cormyr and she doesn't have a title in her name. The reason being that it was a pivotal part of the character that she earn her own way into her future and her nobility. I wanted her to do something on Amia that was deserving of her actually taking her official title.

As for others, I can't really speak for them. The two nobles I've made were that way for specific reasons and not because I like fancy crap in my name. As a matter of fact, ask me six months ago and I would have said I'd never see myself playing a lady or lord because it wasn't really my flavor. But things change, and stories of any direction or origin---as long as they have interesting depth---are alluring to play. I wouldn't be so quick to judge, though I know it's easy to adopt an opinion without much context and a lot more 'group think'.

Yeah, this is kind of how I feel about it too.

Mr. Hackums wrote:

There's very few actually landed nobles. I believe Ser Robert was one, when he had his Barony on Caraigh.

He was never the Baron of Caraigh he just called himself that as he was trying to get into power and become one, it was never supported by the people on the island.

If I could change Amia I'd...

Who is online