Dark Legacy MUD Forum

or a sorceress and her apprentice

@Isabelle - I tend to disagree with that one. A sorceress would likely have some abilities specific to herself or her craft that she would pass on to her apprentice. As it stands now, a paladin could vow for a mage. To make your analogy more accurate, what about restricting vows to those sharing a class as the vower? I'm still surprised about how many paladins I meet who don't know about Laying of Hands. Taking this a step further, what about giving each class an ability (similar to what LoH is for paladins) that could only be learned from someone who vows for you? Not sure how feasible that would be, but it's something more than what we have now.

- Just my thoughts ^_^

Hokuten: That is an interesting idea, but how about change it to have 2 extra (relatively weak) skills per class. One would be for those who have the same class, the other for those of a different class. A warrior may pass to other warriors an extra skill similar to equilibrium, but would pass to a mage a skill which increases their mobility. I would also restrict vowing to tri-avs (or possibly tri-classes...but not much difference), as we have plenty of these around as it is. I would also reinstate the levelling cap before vow at either 10, 30, or Av (can't multiclass without a vow). When you are vowed for, you would gain 4 skills. A warrior would learn both the enhanced equilibrium (which is weaker than regular equilibrium) skill and the increased mobility skill (which would be pretty weak).
Note: The first class of the vowee would have to be one of the classes of the vower.

I think that might make things a bit complicated, and too many people would cry "unfair" if they got vowed for by someone with a skill they find to be useless. Besides - none of these abilities would be new, they'd just be ones that already exist. These abilities would be paramount to the usefulness of a character. Equilibrium is a great example of this ^_^

Here's how I see it working out...let's say Player 1 wants to vow for Player 2. Player 1 must be a tri-av, and Player 2 must be one of the classes that Player 1 is (so if Player 1 is a White Magician, (s)he can't vow for a Druid). Player 1 (White Magician) vows for Player 2 (Paladin). Yay! Now Player 2 can level beyond 10, exit the Newbie Guild, and enter Alora as a happy member of our community. Now Player 2 isn't a full-fledged Paladin yet, because (s)he can't actually *use* Laying of Hands yet. Under the guidance of Player 1, Player 2 learns about the game. Player 1 teaches Player 2 about ooc, auctioning, guilds, and other subjects of interest. In addition, Player 1 helps Player 2 with a bit of equipment here and there.

Here's where things start to split...

Let's say Player 2 doesn't cause any trouble and advances to level 30. Woot! Now (s)he can use Laying of Hands like a real Paladin! All is well, and another happy newbie joins the ranks of erm...Alorians.

Now for the fun part...Player 2 decides that (at lv. 25) (s)he is capable of one-(wo)man armying Alora. After a successful spamming spree, Player 1 decides not to risk his/her neck by vouching for this newbie any longer. Using the "unvow" command, Player 1 removes Player 2's ability to use any of those unlocked channels. Poor Player 2...now his/her bio lists just why the vow was taken away, in the words of Player 1. Here's where Player 3 comes into the story ^_^

Player 3 meets all of the requirements for being able to vow for Player 2. After some discussions and promises to be a good boy/girl, Player 2 gets vowed for again. However, Player 2 gets to wait an extra (30-25=5) FIVE levels to use Laying of Hands. Instead of getting it at lv. 30, (s)he has to wait until lv. 35 as punishment for being stupid.

So what happens if Player 1 only unvowed out of spite? Player 2 can bring the matter up with a Caretaker, who will issue a FINAL and BINDING decision on the matter.

"But Ten," you ask, "what if Player 1 is a horrible vower and never helps Player 2?" Glad you asked! Player 2 can use the "renounce" command to appeal to the Caretakers to crack down on Player 1.

Before anyone says it - abuse of the system will not be tolerated. If you're caught trying to do such a terrible thing, punishment will be swift. Tri-avs will have their characters purged of all equipment and newbies will get banned for a few days to cool off a bit.

As for what abilities you would get, I'm not proposing *new* abilities, so much as perhaps just something you wouldn't want to not have. Equilibrium would be a good one...not sure about other classes...

i don't want anything that relies on caretaker intervention.

instead of skills, you could use experience, like 1 percent of experience that the apprentice gains, is given to the master/mistress as a 'payment' for their teachings.

to prevent abuse, no player would be able to vow for more than X amount of players at a given time, if you want to vow for someone over your 5? max players, you would need to drop one.

note: any experience gain would only be given if the players are connected, no logging off for a month, then coming back in to gather your xp.

and it should never be enough to really make or break you, if 1 percent is too high, lower it. (50 xp per apprentices gained level)

players should be able to vow or unvow at their leisure, the patron takes no responsibility for apprentices who decide to leave them.
So at no time would a patron be given a penalty, only the apprentice will suffer the penalty if they "break their allegiance"

if the patron removes an apprentice, the apprentice would not suffer any penalty. It's only when an apprentice is the initiator of the broken allegiance, that a penalty is inferred.

i am never ever ever vowing for anyone ever again

I only used the idea of intervention to keep people from doing something stupid. If you know that the possibility of losing everything you've worked so hard for is out there, you're less likely to try and risk it all just to spite some newbie who hasn't really hurt you at all.

Caretaker intervention in times of unfairness isn't exactly an alien concept. If you're being threatened, or if some player is abusing the system - you get the Caretakers involved. Dropping a player who is troublesome penalizes them (by removing OOC and their ability to level), so it's *entirely* possible for someone to abuse that. Abuse of any kind becomes the problem of the Caretakers, doesn't it?

thats right, which is why, when we brainstorm new ideas, i first say 'OK, how can we make this, so that there is 'no' abuse possible'
i don't want caretakers being 'needed' for day to day gameplay.

How do you propose abuse be limited? My idea was to create a bit of "mutual risk" to prevent people from trying to work the system to their advantage. The person vowing risks losing their stuff if they cheat, and the vowee risks being slowed down by lack of certain channels. Vowing should be a very serious process, because it helps new people learn the game and builds something close to a community.

i have to agree with vogar eol on the helping part. i have help plenty in my guild (The Forsaken) and newbie with just about everything i know.

When I started playing Dark Legacy, I was level 10, and could not advance, and I kept asking for three or four days to get vowed for by someone. I tried not to be too pushy... I have also tried to behave myself with all of my characters.

Now, when I make alts, I have gotten vowed within five minutes of asking just once, and only one other person (Gaitika, I think) asked me who I was. I feel that it is too easy to get vowed for these days, and I agree with most statements above regarding the need to change vow. Although I thank those who have vowed for my recent alts (I ask for vow mostly so that I can use auction to share my gains from my adventures in a way that brings in some small money...), I applaud Gaitika for asking. I also apologize for not responding when asked, as my character had just been vowed right before I was asked.

I will have to think on the ideas presented here, and see if I can add anything constructive to them.

i like the idea of giving a vower JC powers over their noob. and add in some kind of a warn system. a noob would be able to get 5 warning from other players before their vower would have to put them in time out. if the vower did not adhear to his responsibilitys to teach the noob right from wrong he would be maked for jail time. so say Nimisis vowed for Eltain back when he started, and eltain made a few other players mad, they all give him a warning, which would have to have a real reson in it. once eltain got 5 warning nimisis would have to jail him within an hour (only counting time they are both online) or be jailed himself for neglect.
also any vower that dosnt spend atleast 1 hour online with his noob must pay a fine and relinquish his responsibilitys. (i know i spelled a lot of stuff wrong but oh well)

hmm so i could vow for people who didnt want me to then jail them? neat..

ok get real people there is no problem with voiw if you dont want to hear what people are saying on ooc and such TURN IT OFF or ignore them OR go RP sense you want it used for a rp reason why dont you just go into goddamned rp mode? then you dont have to hear a damned thing ok? good and without vowing you cant use certin things such as YELL so if your pet is in a differant room and you want it to come into your room your basicly screwed unless it already has a pet hoop or you have enough favor as a level 4 (unlikely)

That is quite possibly the best rant i have ever heard because that MAKES PERFECT SENSE! Kudos to Bon. If ya don't wanna hear it TURN IT OFF.

Actually it doesn't make any sense at all, and largely ignores the entire point of this thread.

Vow was originally intended as a certain kind of mentoring program, where new people could get taken under somebodies wing. The problem is that it is not seen as this anymore, so the result is that everybody just gets vow'd instantly.

That is not a problem in of itself. The issue is that if vow isn't being used for this purpose, why does it even exist?

Two solutions:
1. Remove vow completely, allowing everybody to use ooc and other such channels at creation.
2. Revamp the entire vow system.

And I, quite predictably, disagree with Bonn's rant. Aside from the weirdness of ideas etc, the main point behind all this discussion is that people actually want to improve something about the game. The concept of vowing could mean so much more, and help structure the way newbies learn about the game. But no, if you have something to say or improve upon: DONT, I REPEAT DONT! Ignore your inner urging to express human intellect, kindness, and ingenuity. THIS IS MORALLY WRONG! Literally take your head, and shove it into the sand. Once all problems arent visually perceivable, they go away. No really, they do....trust me.

(Personal aside: if Bonn advocates ignoring things you have a problem with...then why oh why would he post about it instead of just ignoring it)

OK, i think you guys just hate Bonn and out of that ground are commited to disagreeing with everything he says. Therefore he disagrees with you. (Therefore you are actually both in agreement not to agree with each other thereby completly contradicting your feud.)

The point he was trying to make was that some people do not want to be vowed for out of the fact that they don't want all those channels. I've heard it before.

"HEY! I didn't want to be vowed for!!!"

"Sorry man, just figured at level 40 you needed a vow by now. Sorry that i didn't realise my mistake until it was to late."

Instead of not being vowed for, do as Bonn had said, because alot of times that person is trying to RP, and should just turn on the RP mode.

Bonn's post was, from what I can understand of it, off-topic and, in my opinion, idiotic. He completely ignores the point of the topic and insteads rants about how people who don't want to be vowed for should just accept it and go into RP mode? Perhaps their wishes not to be vowed for should just be followed. If you're vowing for people without even talking to them, you are plain stupid; vowing, as its supposed to be, is a pledge to take responsibility for a new player and, as such, should not be done so lightly. If you talk to them and they tell you they don't wish to be vowed for, you're just a plain ****. I believe that vowers in either of these situations should be punished severely.

I agree with Hrulgin that the vowing system, in its current form, is pretty pointless in its current form and should either be completely taken out and, possibly, be implemented into the family or guild systems.

I would still disagree with that, because it turns into a veritable pissing contest of who gets to have their name stamped into your biography permanently. This pisses people off, including me.

then vowing should be limited to i think 3 ppl tops, that is if u wish to have it revamped

another idea i was thinking of was the ability of the newbie to config -allowvow that way if you dont want a certain player to vow for ya you turn it on till the one you do want to vow for ya is ready to vow

...or we could just punish those who vow carelessly as they should be punished...

oh it was off topic? im sorry i was assuming we were taling about vowing HOW "idiotic" of me look my point was made and it was hardly off topic and all of your sugestions would not improve the game it would make it more of a pain see if you dont vow odds are you will have newbies running around asking for a vow every 5 seconds and you will ignore them anyways or you will go rp or turn off the channels i dont give a damn what you do with vow but if you do you need to make somethings aviable without it such as yell thats the main one