Guybrush Threepwood

How new are newcomers? I was happy to state opinions when I was under 100 days, though I probably started somewhere between 60 and 100.

You can't reasonably go for only mechanics either Burns, as the mechanics in this game are quite lacking for any sort of RP. You could stand yourself on a bridge to bar my way and I could easily walk past you without having to fight you and move on to the next room. You could slaughter me, and I could move on and slaughter someone else immediately. The fact that someone (mechanics wise) can easily ignore something no person could in RL (such as someone attempting to defend someone else. No, it doesn't make sense that a person needs a spell to stand between to people, and even so there is no such spell yet in MD to get) is just a little silly. Also, needing to wait 40 minutes to fight again also seems a little strange. If you're better (and the mechanics say you are) You aught to be able to go off and fight again. Also, the mechanics greatly ignore numbers. It's easy for some characters to slaughter everyone in MD, but only because the mechanics only allow for fights one at a time, if a person COULD fight two people at once, it would be much harder. If a person could fight 10 people at once, well, it's hard to beat 60 critters, no matter how strong you are. At some point, there are too many blasted birds, and really, in that situation, should target all really hit all 60 critters? Yes, it's hypothetical, but the point is that the mechanics don't account for everything, and can't.

Not just the name, but mostly. Also by the suggested role. Yeah, it's a suggestion, but if a person has an idea they should go with the one that seems closest to the suggestions. Which, again, may just be me. But there's a few applications for this, just one for seal of six. Also, mine was partly combative as well. And yes, I understand it's a neutral alliance, but I'd like to think of that as a suggestion, and rather, try unbiased.

Allows you to use your army to guard an other character for a limited time. When that character will be attacked, the attacker will fight you instead. Good for roleplay but but also for practical use. It might have unexplored results under special situations. It will grant 4 casts, regenerable every two weeks, or increase maximum cast number by 4 if you allready have the spell. According to this, the person I cast this on should have this for a DEFENSE. If they are attacked, instead I will be attacked. That is not the case. Instead, when that character ATTACKS, they get my army. Perhaps it's just a language translation issue, but they should get my ritual for the next incoming battle, not the first outgoing, according to the description.

I believe you mean 750. Anywho, I know I have brought this up before, but is there any way we could get a spell like Gaurdian army in the WS? I mean one that actually does what Gaurdian Army says. And preferably change the one in there's description? I know the whole not having the description right is kind of a MD thing, which is fine and all on something like weaken defense, you have it, you didn't spend anything important to get it, it's just there. However, when you spend a WP it would be nice if the thing did what it said it does. Though the current spell with it's current use is totally helpful and worth a WP.

Is it just me, or does it seem like Phantasm's idea fits better with the seal of six? For some reason I feel that that group would be the murderous creepy grave keepers, but that could just be me... Also, just out of curiosity, does anyone feel that any of these ideas might be better off in the seal of six?

The ONLY purpose for this is for extremely low level players, who can't put up a defense that won't go down and allow people to get to their crits that they like more, OR to keep people from attacking you entirely. Both are pointless. If you can stable a critter, it should have to stay there a while, and then, there is no point in stabling it, because the only reason (unless you have a person chasing you down with regen a lot) to stable a critter is so that it is healthy when you need to use it, and you won't be able to. If you just want to not be attacked, well, that's not ok either. There are ways in the game to keep your critters alive, even some ways to make sure you can't be attacked. Figure them out, or don't, but this is a system that would just take more time to make then it could possibly be worth, unless some added benefit can be gained from stabling a critter that doesn't break the system. As for losing honor and loyalty, well, you don't need loyalty, you do not lead an alliance. Honor is easy to gain if you know the right people, and REALLY easy to gain if you get pummeled a lot, even if you don't know the right people. So... What's the problem?

I'd love to take a look at it I suppose. If you would like to quiz me on some things first, go ahead. I understand that you may not consider me knowledgeable enough on the subject of tokens and battles to not end up getting too much information.

What's with all this about hedge trimmers? Why do we keep bringing up hedge trimmers? And just out of curiosity, why is it a slightly undead individual is the best man for the job to "keep the dead where they belong"? Not saying that it's not a little fitting, but it does seem a little hypocritical if you're going to wander around putting zombies back in their graves.

Useful auras, that aren't overpowered, aren't already in the game, and won't take forever to program? And you need to make a different one for each token? Good luck.

Before tokens came out people with massive stats were strong. Tokens that increase based on those stats would make them... Strong... Wait, they were already unreasonable. So now a guy with 200 initiative has 400 and a guy with 400 has 800, how is this a problem? It won't take any more or less work to catch up with those people. As for what I was thinking for the cap, it was more of, 1/3rd of your light principal goes to attack, with a max of 80% (whatever) of your personal attack. That way for the full effect people with lesser stats would need lesser principals, but Burn's way works too. Or even better, the percentage would not be based of of the personal stat, but the stat that critter has before any other effects are added in a battle. (This way if you use 6 critters, the token will be less effective, returning some cause for using less critters, assuming you don't have a bunch of BPs Imps or Rustys that is.)

It's a temple... He said he would be happy to move on when it was claimed by someone from the tribunals. (I assume he means if one of the alliances claims it.) In the meantime, it only makes sense he has an outpost in the new lands. Now sure, I think the whole concept is a bit wonky, but it's in following with the alliance and why not put the outpost in the empty temple? He is not claiming the temple as his, or for the Savelites, he is simply using it for a while.

A cap that would double your attack would make them useless? Why on earth do you bother grinding then? Doubling all grinding efforts in the future as well as everything you've done in the past seems darned nice to me.

So, is there going to be a veterans one? And if so, could I compete?

You just had to bring that up didn't you? She didn't even mention you, but you had to mention it... Anywho, I would like to state some other important practical aspects of the Care Takers in my thoughts for it as an alliance. The alliance would work to create shelter and reprieve for all individuals, including food. Large crops being maintained by the alliance in case of famine. Research would be done in order to better the lives of those in MD, with an emphasis in medical research (I don't think I need to explain why I am the man for that). In a practical and less Role Playing side (in that this would not be a stated in character purpose for the alliance.) Quests would be done through the alliance relating to it's members and it's role in MD. One quest already in mind includes more RP interaction as well as a place in a written story (Most likely to be written by me.) to include the events of the quest and all those involved in their actions during the quest.

I stated that temp stats on the Angien are not an issue at first level because it's easy to get armor. But I suppose the Ve is an issue at MP3. And it's true, it would allow people who have no idea what they're doing to get things that would be useful to them. Though, how are these people getting Angiens? I would think if they win them as some sort of reward, then go ahead and let them use it. It's a good way to reward easy quests for MP3s.

Umm... didn't I just suggest limiting the bonus based off a percentage of personal stats? "because a little farming with personal stats gives you more than this." And if you do that little bit of farming the bonus goes up. No amount of farming will ever match farming plus tokens, or make tokens negligible since their bonus is base of your stats. (Indirectly. The cap would be based on YOUR stats, the amount the give still based on principals.) And 200 attack per critter is nice. Maybe you don't care for an extra 1200 attack (assuming you have one on each critter, of course you could have more than one on each, claw III, claw II blah blah.) Of course, 200 attack might be based on MY stats. (Again, percentage not mentioned) For me it might also be something else depending on that percentage.

Yeah, no one is going to sac an older Angien for temporary stats, so that doesn't really matter. As for the issue of stats on trees, they do have permanent bonuses for sacing. (And with that many wins, it is significant.) I really don't have an issue with the sac values of the level 1 myself. Getting armor at MP3 doesn't matter unless you grind, and most grinders know how to get the armor at MP3 without it anyway.

You are quite right to say that my idea is not necessarily neutral. It may be more appropriate to call it unbiased rather than neutral, and as such may not at all be what Mur wants. At the same time, I do not believe that this is necessarily an idea that does not fit with the Tribunal (especially since nothing is known of it) and perhaps the bit about neutrality could be fudged a bit. (Entirely OOC: Heck, I would like a war, it would give me something to do. As far as my character though, his job is to protect life, and as such needs to go against the concept. However, due to the role of protecting the innocent, I am also justified in joining any war on either side through my role. So yay me! Even if I do have to try to prevent them... Which I will continue to do, as it is in character. Also, I enjoy the politics of war as much as I do the fighting, and this would add some politics to the table. And Burns, if this idea were implemented it would just make wars more balanced and give you more heads to chop off. More exciting for you.)

A couple times in the last two days I have clicked to store my heat, the message that 4 orbs were filled comes up, and then... No heat in my orbs, none in my erolin. Ok, sure, it's just 41 Ap, but sometimes I need my Ap. Not a huge hassle, but still an inconvenience.

*rolls his eyes.* The problem is that tokens are infinitly (I like to exagerate) overpowered. The entire point of being strong is to fight in wars. The entire point of fixing tokens is for wars. My point is that tokens should be HELPFUL. Heck, doubling stats is HELPFUL. 10k initiative is LUDICROUS. My point is that Lifeline's idea would not help. I would still like my tokens if they gave me a 100 attack bonus on each of my critters, I would buy them. I would be ok with a token adding 200 to all of my critters. Tokens adding 3k or more damage to each critter before auras, well, that's not so ok. Tokens need to be balanced for the purpose of wars. Not made useless mind you, just less overpowering. As it is, Lifeline's suggestion keeps them as overpowering for the only time it matters.

Redneck, that will be up to whomever Mur decides to give leadership of the alliance to. You can read over the posts people who have suggested an alliance if you like to see what their requirement might be should they be the ones to get it.

Sorry about the other topic Chewett... I am a terrible VS, whatever that is. I for one have never been much for the current alliances, I have made it clear to those who ask that my role is to care for people, not for lands or some religion or creatures. During my time in MD I think I have made it abundantly clear to those who know me that I love research. I would like to apply for the role of leadership for the Caretakers. Here is my idea for the role of the alliance: Everything the caretakers do is for the care of the people of MD, be that research, defense of the innocent (we'll get to that later), or simply taking care of messes once we have failed to protect them. (Crime scene investigation, care of the dead.) This alliance would ideally get itself involved in the politics of the other lands, doing it's best to prevent war. Should a war break out they may choose a side, in order to protect an innocent people. (I understand that Mur stated the four lands could be involved in wars, the Tribunal is not one of them.) Because of this, if a strong enough group of warriors were collected it would dissuade unreasonable wars and require the public announcement of cause for wars (I realize that I myself am not that strong). (Without reason a war would go under unreasonable and the care takers would step in on the other side.) When I see Tribunal I think judgement, and I think this alliance plan fits that. When I see caretakers, I think caring for people. When I see tribunal, I also think a group of people. As necessary for this alliance to do it's job and remain neutral, the members would have to be relatively neutral themselves, and would also require group decisions, public group decisions available for scrutiny of the public. As leader I would do administrative tasks, as well as train any new members in the basics of the alliance, mainly caring for people, probably in basic first aid. However, decisions would not be made by me. The decision to accept any new members, to side in any war, or take any other serious measure would be voted on by the group. (Obviously at first any decision for new members would be made by me, there would be no other members.) In a practical light, the first thing I would do as administrator, (Besides recruiting new members, which I feel would most likely happen by itself here in the forums, though if not I will actively attempt to recruit.) would be to go to each alliance leader and have them assign an envoy to the caretakers who's job it would be to keep the Care Takers up to date on pertinent information. Also in consideration is allowing one envoy from each land a vote in major decisions of the care takers. Because there would be one vote from each land it may cancel out any bias, however, more consideration must be done one this front. I feel that I, as a doctor, and as an individual who has never been associated with any land or alliance, and has purposefully avoided such things, would be ideal for this role. However, I also realize that as far as politics go, as well as public popularity, I may not be the best man for the job. I would be happy to have someone who is more of a "people person" aware than myself take the role of leader and serve beneath them. Individuals who come to mind are Ailith, Handy Pockets and a few others. As for people to be accepted into the group, applicants would be preferably neutral, (I understand this would be hard, few people in the game have not been in some alliance.) other than that, they would need to care firstly for people, other people, and have some useful skillset for caring for those people, be they a knight, a mortician, a priest, a doctor or some such thing. No, barkeep is not an acceptable task. Yes, I suppose people need one, but we are looking for more along the lines of fundamental needs. (Mortician, or priest of some sort is included, while Guy could care less about the dead he does recognize others do care about how the dead are handled, and thus it matters to him, even if he would use a thousand corpses to barricade an enemy from people he was defending. Edit: Oh, a mission statement or motto or something... "Protect everyone at all times. Fail less everyday." Sorry about earlier Chewett. I for one have never been much for the current alliances, I have made it clear to those who ask that my role is to care for people, not for lands or some religion or creatures. During my time in MD I think I have made it abundantly clear to those who know me that I love research. I would like to apply for the role of leadership for the Caretakers. Here is my idea for the role of the alliance: Everything the caretakers do is for the care of the people of MD, be that research, defense of the innocent (we'll get to that later), or simply taking care of messes once we have failed to protect them. (Crime scene investigation, care of the dead.) This alliance would ideally get itself involved in the politics of the other lands, doing it's best to prevent war. Should a war break out they may choose a side, in order to protect an innocent people. (I understand that Mur stated the four lands could be involved in wars, the Tribunal is not one of them.) Because of this, if a strong enough group of warriors were collected it would dissuade unreasonable wars and require the public announcement of cause for wars (I realize that I myself am not that strong). (Without reason a war would go under unreasonable and the care takers would step in on the other side.) When I see Tribunal I think judgement, and I think this alliance plan fits that. When I see caretakers, I think caring for people. When I see tribunal, I also think a group of people. As necessary for this alliance to do it's job and remain neutral, the members would have to be relatively neutral themselves, and would also require group decisions, public group decisions available for scrutiny of the public. As leader I would do administrative tasks, as well as train any new members in the basics of the alliance, mainly caring for people, probably in basic first aid. However, decisions would not be made by me. The decision to accept any new members, to side in any war, or take any other serious measure would be voted on by the group. (Obviously at first any decision for new members would be made by me, there would be no other members.) In a practical light, the first thing I would do as administrator, (Besides recruiting new members, which I feel would most likely happen by itself here in the forums, though if not I will actively attempt to recruit.) would be to go to each alliance leader and have them assign an envoy to the caretakers who's job it would be to keep the Care Takers up to date on pertinent information. Also in consideration is allowing one envoy from each land a vote in major decisions of the care takers. Because there would be one vote from each land it may cancel out any bias, however, more consideration must be done one this front. I feel that I, as a doctor, and as an individual who has never been associated with any land or alliance, and has purposefully avoided such things, would be ideal for this role. However, I also realize that as far as politics go, as well as public popularity, I may not be the best man for the job. I would be happy to have someone who is more of a "people person" aware than myself take the role of leader and serve beneath them. Individuals who come to mind are Ailith, Handy Pockets and a few others. As for people to be accepted into the group, applicants would be preferably neutral, (I understand this would be hard, few people in the game have not been in some alliance.) other than that, they would need to care firstly for people, other people, and have some useful skillset for caring for those people, be they a knight, a mortician, a priest, a doctor or some such thing. No, barkeep is not an acceptable task. Yes, I suppose people need one, but we are looking for more along the lines of fundamental needs. (Mortician, or priest of some sort is included, while Guy could care less about the dead he does recognize others do care about how the dead are handled, and thus it matters to him, even if he would use a thousand corpses to barricade an enemy from people he was defending. Edit: Oh, a mission statement or motto or something... "Protect everyone at all times. Fail less everyday."

I would love to be able to choose to fight without tokens. Be helpful for a lot of things, but this doesn't fix the problem if wars come about. 10-20 battles is enough to slaughter for that purpose. Also, what would happen on defense? I think this may have been mentioned before, but what about capping the token bonus at a percentage of your stats? The percentage could be different for each token and I really have no idea what percentage that would be, but, it would be easy to keep it from being exceptionally overpowered (except on people who are already exceptionally overpowered, so really, who cares.) and it could still be useful to everyone. Also, the initiative bonus from blood 1 is, to my knowledge, always 1 or 0, because it does not take your stats into consideration and as far as I know there is no critter with more than 5 initiative. A bonus 1 initiative might be fun nifty for an MP3, or on an elemental to keep them hitting before a chaos archer (though not that nice) but it's a pretty darn worthless token. Blood III has the exact same problem, it's worthless. Unless of course things have been changed since I last checked, which was a long time ago. I haven't done much fighting with the whole tokens on defense always being 100% issue.

Here's a serious flaw with lack of history. Who the heck made this place? Someone had to. It's supposedly a rich country, inhabitants are unknown. Not necessarily non-existant, the sign to the new world specifically says, unknown. No history to a place makes no sense. I get it, I could see why Mur would like it, but there is no such thing as something with no history. On that note, making up random and terrible history is a bad idea as well.