Ever since playing Farnsworth I have wondered why virtually all cityguards in all cities are good aligned. Having given it some thought I think the guards should reflect the city.

As a first matter though, the question is why shouldn't they all be good? The answer I think is the same answer as why all Tribunals are not good aligned. Guards are paid to keep order, not to fight for a particular alignment. There can therefore be good guards, evil guards, or morally indifferent/balanced/whateveryouwanttocallneutral guards. There is nothing inherently alignment specific about doing the job of a city guard.

The second question then is how to decide what a city guard's align would be in any given instance. I think in that regard there are two steps, the ooc game balancing issue and the ic roleplay issue.

Game balancing. Ok, we all used to kill cityguards in galadon to practice disarm. That has changed with the advent of the kick ass guards now. Clearly that denotes a change in balancing representing an imm decision that city guards are not just for kids anymore. Frankly, you really don't see many people ranking or practicing on guards anymore, in any of the major cities. So I don't think there is much of a game balance issue in changing alignment in that regard. Also, few goodies now use their request power on guards, at least not so far as I can tell. There is only one instance of importance - the hamsah city guard with the key to the locked gate tower. But other than that, pretty much never. Changing alignment means that instead of requesting a goodie would have to kill the mob for what they want. It also means that an evil character wouldn't be getting as good exp for killing the now neutral or evil mob. I don't see this as a problem.

Roleplay. I think this is the strongest point. Fact is, I think it makes the most sense for guards to represent the flavor, the atmosphere, of a city. Tar Valon guards should be good aligned. Arkham guards should be evil or neutral. Galadon should almost certainly be neutral. Hamsah, well, I'd actually make a mix. I recognize that it would become a bit of an exercise to the area writer, if that person is still around, or to the rest of the immstaff, but I don't think it's too big an exercise and I think it makes a lot of sense. As things stand now, it really does not make sense that arkham guards are good aligned, that all galadon guards are good aligned, etc.

Just something I've been thinking about for a while.

Back to work.

-Mark

Although the answer already given is an explanation enough, here's some additional reasoning against changing the guard alignments.

One, someone mentioned that there are few places for evils to rank, so let them have some city guards. Let them get wanted flags for it too, because this leads into the second reason not to change it.

Two, evil city guards would promote the good people killing them, which could not only get them wanted flags, but isn't that good no matter how evil the guard. Killing someone who is loyally defending their home town isn't a very good thing, is it?

Three, the good alignment of the guards tends to keep good people from killing them, which for lawbreaking good PCs leads to an interesting RP conflict. If you're good and get attacked by good guards, you should run to make sure you don't kill them. They're guards, they care more about defending the city than about morals, so to them if you've broken the laws, you're evil and deserve to die. Being a storm giant or an elf isn't a defense, if you're fighting a guard you must be a bad person.

The reasoning here may be why the area designers chose good aligned guards, and it may be why future cities might also have them. Then again, the reasoning I put forth may have nothing to do with those choices. Either way, unless you can come up with a strong reasoning other than 'fitting the feel' of a city, the guards will most likely remain good and orderly people who live to defend their homes.

---Quislet, answering this for anyone who would actually care, other than Graatch.

One, someone mentioned that there are few places for evils to rank, so let them have some city guards

I'm not a big player of evil characters, but I would have to say that this is just plain untrue.

Let them get wanted flags for it too, because this leads into the second reason not to change it.

Since when do you get wanted for slaying mobs in a protected city? Unless there's some change recently that I never once saw during Ulthur's 650 hours, this is untrue also. EDIT: Aside from guildguards.

If you're good and get attacked by good guards, you should run to make sure you don't kill them.

I disagree here again. As Ulthur when I was wanted, I used to shout at the guards to get away from me. When they didn't, I killed them. I think it depends enitrely on your characters roleplay. After all, they're trying to stop me from killing an evil guy, so they must be evil too.

They're guards, they care more about defending the city than about morals, so to them if you've broken the laws, you're evil and deserve to die.

So... they're neutral/orderly, is what you're saying.

Basically, your RP angle is voided by the fact that Arbiter/Tribunal have almost always been represented by a good and an evil God, and divided into good and evil members. The Tribunal Cabal makes a point of demonstrating that alignment is not related to the laws. The cityguards do not reflect this. I don't give two ####s about Graatch or his obsessive-compulsive desire for immortal attention. I think adjusting cityguard alignments is a good idea.

Ulthur

"Don't worry cutsy buttons. Tonight, dyin's not on the menu!"

- Strong Bad as Dangeresque

>One, someone mentioned that there are few places for evils
>to rank, so let them have some city guards
>
>I'm not a big player of evil characters, but I would have to
>say that this is just plain untrue.

I haven't played an evil in years, so maybe I should've made it clear that this one was based entirely on what others said. It doesn't surprise me that they were wrong.

>Let them get wanted flags for it too, because this leads
>into the second reason not to change it.
>
>Since when do you get wanted for slaying mobs in a protected city?
>Unless there's some change recently that I never once saw during
>Ulthur's 650 hours, this is untrue also. EDIT: Aside from guildguards.

Again, something I haven't done in years. Well before Tribunal, some of the law types would flag people for killing guards. I guess the flags weren't even as common as I thought back then, if they're virtually non-existent now.

>If you're good and get attacked by good guards, you should
>run to make sure you don't kill them.
>
>I disagree here again. As Ulthur when I was wanted, I used to
>shout at the guards to get away from me. When they didn't, I
>killed them. I think it depends enitrely on your characters
>roleplay. After all, they're trying to stop me from killing
>an evil guy, so they must be evil too.

For me, doing what you did would be bad roleplay, so I overlooked the fact that it works fine for some others. I'd think that by taking the life of something good, you're slowly slipping towards evil. And of course, you're free to disagree.

>They're guards, they care more about defending the city than about
>morals, so to them if you've broken the laws, you're evil and deserve
>to die.
>
>So... they're neutral/orderly, is what you're saying.

My interpretation of their alignment was a little loose there, and could just as easily be seen as neutral. I was only trying to say that from an RP angle it doesn't automatically make them neutral any more than your allowing them to die fighting you makes you evil. Protecting your homeland and fellow citizens can be a greater good than killing a good aligned wanted person. Also, very strict good/orderly could see a lawbreaker as automatically evil regardless of what others might think. It's all RP from different viewpoints.

>Basically, your RP angle is voided by the fact that Arbiter/Tribunal
>have almost always been represented by a good and an evil God, and
>divided into good and evil members. The Tribunal Cabal makes a point
>of demonstrating that alignment is not related to the laws. The
>cityguards do not reflect this. I don't give two ####s about Graatch
>or his obsessive-compulsive desire for immortal attention. I think
>adjusting cityguard alignments is a good idea.

Why should the cityguards reflect the cabal in the slightest? They've been around to see three very different law based cabals, and while they've worked alongside each other, they're different groups. It's like saying that the FBI and the local PD should be one. Your point there isn't much more solid than mine were, at least as I see it.

So my briefly considered points were flimsy and don't well support keeping the guards the same. Is there really all that solid a reason for changing them? The reason I ask is that regardless of my poorly phrased arguments, things tend to stay the same when there's no clear reason to change them.

For me, doing what you did would be bad roleplay, so I overlooked the fact that it works fine for some others. I'd think that by taking the life of something good, you're slowly slipping towards evil. And of course, you're free to disagree.

Yeah, well, I think Ulthur had a pretty solid roleplay. As you said elsewhere in your post, it all depends on a persons role as to how or weather or not they justify it. Personally I think it's fairly bad roleplay being forced on us by the way cityguards are now. The mobs have no regard for lightwalkers? Then they shouldn't be good aligned (in general), they should be neutral/orderly unless there's some really good excuse, i.e. Tar Valon where almost every mob is good aligned.

Why should the cityguards reflect the cabal in the slightest?

Because both the cabal and the cityguards respond to the 'wanted' flag, which the cabal places. If it's the same as it was when I was an Arbiter, the cityguards also report the locations of criminals that walk by them over the cb. I think those are some pretty pointed similarities.

Is there really all that solid a reason for changing them?

Well, I don't think it makes much sense as it is. Good guards in Arkham? Where did they all come from? Most of the mobs in Galadon are neutral, how did they produce all good-aligned guards? Also, why does being good-algined require the additional handicap when being wanted?

Ulthur

"Don't worry cutsy buttons. Tonight, dyin's not on the menu!"

- Strong Bad as Dangeresque

I hope you didn't think I was insulting your RP, I only meant that your style wasn't mine, so I didn't think of things the same way you did.

An example of not thinking of things the same way, what you said about the wanted flag completely slipped my mind. That definitely indicates similarities with the cabal and the city guards.

After some consideration, I agree, from an RP standpoint not all guards should be good aligned. From a game balance standpoint, I really don't know.

However, for good aligned people being wanted, isn't breaking the law considered bad for good people whether you're for the law or not? I know good people break the law, but shouldn't there be some reason more than roleplay to keep the laws? I know, fairly weak argument there, but I don't have time right now to make a better one.

n/t

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Just out of curiosity, what does no response mean? Does it mean that some of you imms have read it and disagree? Agree but aren't motivated to write? Nobody reads?

I've always wondered why you don't reply to each and every gameplay and ask immortal post. At the very least to note it had been read. I mean, the stated purpose of the forum (gameplay and ask imm) is to discuss and question the game with _imms_. When people post to those forums I think it would be good if one of the imms could simply post "Read and taken under advisement." Or "Not going to happen, sorry." Or "Wow, how could we never have thought of that." or whatever. Just something to show the person it's not in a vacuum.

Since you insist, I will reply and say "I really don't care one way or another about this. I can come up with arguments for or against. So I don't know, and the default is not to touch what works. Maybe someone else will get it."

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

You'll 'fix' stuff that isn't broken and really doesn't make the game any better (silver spirits comes to mind), but ignore other things that actually make sense? Oh, this reminds me to make a rant post about evil heroing, too. Goodies have it hellaeasy to hero, and a lot more places to do it. Evils don't. Especially now. Pah.

You'll 'fix' stuff that isn't broken and really doesn't make the game any better (silver spirits comes to mind), but ignore other things that actually make sense?

Not that I know what you're talking about regarding spirits, but it's pretty obvious the immortals don't sit around and think of things to change for no reason. The only thing I could think of is that a while back they were worth way, way more XP than equivalently dangerous NPCs and they were put back in line with the usual scale.

As for Graatch's argument, I could argue that good-aligned people would be more inclined to take up protective roles. I could also argue it his way. My overriding argument is that the area designers intended for them to be that alignment, and we respect that. When I see a post like that, and it's not really in my 'area', I don't respond. When a bunch of immortals all do the same, we're basically waiting for someone else to take care of it. If most people feel neutral or opposed, there's no sense adding to the workload when there's a number of things we could work on that we agree is a good thing.

Oh, this reminds me to make a rant post

Or just make a normal post.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Didn't mean to have my post sound so irritated, was in a bit of a hurry. Which I am still in now. I'll be back with my 'normal' post in a while. :P

>Just out of curiosity, what does no response mean? Does it
>mean that some of you imms have read it and disagree? Agree
>but aren't motivated to write? Nobody reads?

It most likely means it has been read and given the amount of scrutiny it deserves. I read the forums every single day.

>I've always wondered why you don't reply to each and every
>gameplay and ask immortal post.

I always wonder why mortals think they are entitled to everything.

>At the very least to note it had been read.

Because it is a better use of my time than coding, or fixing bugs, or updating areas, or ...

>I mean, the stated purpose of the forum
> gameplay and ask imm) is to discuss and question the game
>with _imms_.

And lots of posts do get responses. And things that really don't strike chords with someone usually get left alone.

>When people post to those forums I think it
>would be good if one of the imms could simply post "Read and
>taken under advisement." Or "Not going to happen, sorry." Or
>"Wow, how could we never have thought of that." or whatever.

I'll make sure to set up an autoposter for me that says "Read and circular filed"

>Just something to show the person it's not in a vacuum.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

>>Just out of curiosity, what does no response mean? Does it
>>mean that some of you imms have read it and disagree? Agree
>>but aren't motivated to write? Nobody reads?
>
>It most likely means it has been read and given the amount of
>scrutiny it deserves. I read the forums every single day.
>

You know Zulgh, I think you need to sit back and think about how you react to people. I've noticed a marked increase in the last months in your short fuse. Maybe you are just generally angry at players for whatever reason, but you are very caustic and insulting when neither are called for, and when nobody has done anything to impugn you or your work. In fact you have been universally thanked for your work doing all this bug fixing and coding. I think you are just fed up with whatever the cheating or bad things you perceive among the playerbase and it comes out - consciously or not. Here, your very first response to a purely friendly question is to insult. "the amount of scrutiny it deserves." Come on. Why would you choose to say something like that? It's just petty.

>>I've always wondered why you don't reply to each and every
>>gameplay and ask immortal post.
>
>I always wonder why mortals think they are entitled to
>everything.
>
I can't speak for all people who play characters but as far as I am concerned, I dont think I am entitled to everything. I think I am entitled to whatever the rules say I am entitled to, and in this instance the forum was put up - by you - with the express purpose of discussing game topics with imms. Therefore, imms are supposed to be part of the conversation. You are in fact soliciting people to come ask you questions and bring issues up. A response in that situation seems reasonable, as I said, even if it's a "read and not changing" or something like that. But again, you are being confrontational and angry for no reason, and making what was a simple question into a fight. You shouldn't.

>>At the very least to note it had been read.
>
>Because it is a better use of my time than coding, or fixing
>bugs, or updating areas, or ...
>

If as you say you read the forums every day - and I am sure you do, honestly - then you are already at the post. I imagine it would take about five seconds to post a four or five word reply. And remember, it is not something that is necessary on all forums. Obviously the battlefield or the various other forums do not hold themselves out to be dialogues between players and imms. But the gameplay and ask immortal do. I would think the five seconds it takes to reply to those (and only those that some other imm hasn't already responded to in some way, which is most) is not prohibitive at all, and would not in truth really take you away from coding or fixing bugs or updating areas or...

>>I mean, the stated purpose of the forum
>> gameplay and ask imm) is to discuss and question the game
>>with _imms_.
>
>And lots of posts do get responses. And things that really
>don't strike chords with someone usually get left alone.
>

Yes, exactly. So say so. Perhaps say why. People are taking the time to come and post their ideas and thoughts - ideas and thoughts you have asked for - because they want to make the game better. They don't have to, they could just play. They could just look at the battlefield. But they are trying to be constructive and helpful. A simple acknowledgement that the thought was heard and either accepted or rejected or still being considered seems appropriate.

>>When people post to those forums I think it
>>would be good if one of the imms could simply post "Read and
>>taken under advisement." Or "Not going to happen, sorry." Or
>>"Wow, how could we never have thought of that." or whatever.
>
>
>I'll make sure to set up an autoposter for me that says "Read
>and circular filed"
>

Right. Very open minded and friendly of you. I'm sorry you are so angry that you take every opportunity, or in fact just create an opportunity, to be mean. My post was neither angry nor insulting. I'm hoping yours can be as well.

>>Just something to show the person it's not in a vacuum.
>
>

>>>Just out of curiosity, what does no response mean? Does
>it
>>>mean that some of you imms have read it and disagree? Agree
>>>but aren't motivated to write? Nobody reads?
>>
>>It most likely means it has been read and given the amount
>of
>>scrutiny it deserves. I read the forums every single day.
>>
>
>You know Zulgh, I think you need to sit back and think about
>how you react to people. I've noticed a marked increase in
>the last months in your short fuse. Maybe you are just
>generally angry at players for whatever reason, but you are
>very caustic and insulting when neither are called for, and
>when nobody has done anything to impugn you or your work. In
>fact you have been universally thanked for your work doing all
>this bug fixing and coding. I think you are just fed up with
>whatever the cheating or bad things you perceive among the
>playerbase and it comes out - consciously or not. Here, your
>very first response to a purely friendly question is to
>insult. "the amount of scrutiny it deserves." Come on. Why
>would you choose to say something like that? It's just petty.

Why would I assume you are talking about me specifically? I think you are trying to get under the skin of all immortals, not just me. Asking the immortal staff to respond to every little bitch, moan, whine, etc on this forum is assanine and a colossule waste of time that could be put to better use elsewhere. I think you don't have a ####ing clue what it takes to run this game, and continue to expect more and more.

As for "the amount of scrutiny it deserves"...In case you hadn't noticed, there are enough posts that are hardly constructive or just plain assanine, or don't really strike anyone on the staff as something they wish to champion and push for...and they get the amount of scrutiny they deserve. No matter what you hope for, we are not going to respond to every single little thing.

>>>I've always wondered why you don't reply to each and every
>>>gameplay and ask immortal post.
>>
>>I always wonder why mortals think they are entitled to
>>everything.
>>
>I can't speak for all people who play characters but as far as
>I am concerned, I dont think I am entitled to everything.

Just a response to your questions.

>I think I am entitled to whatever the rules say I am entitled
>to, and in this instance the forum was put up - by you - with
>the express purpose of discussing game topics with imms.

And we reserve the right not to waste our time.

>Therefore, imms are supposed to be part of the conversation.

And silence can be one half of a conversation.

>You are in fact soliciting people to come ask you questions
>and bring issues up. A response in that situation seems
>reasonable, as I said, even if it's a "read and not changing"
>or something like that.

And what does silence mean?


>But again, you are being confrontational and angry for no reason,
>and making what was a
>simple question into a fight. You shouldn't.

And you again demand a response to every single question. I'm surprised you haven't mailed the immortal staff every day asking why this hasn't been responded to yet (or have you been mailing only Pico and not the rest of the staff?)

You should learn that you aren't going to get a response to everything...live with it.


>>>At the very least to note it had been read.
>>
>>Because it is a better use of my time than coding, or fixing
>>bugs, or updating areas, or ...
>>
>
>If as you say you read the forums every day - and I am sure
>you do, honestly - then you are already at the post. I
>imagine it would take about five seconds to post a four or
>five word reply. And remember, it is not something that is
>necessary on all forums. Obviously the battlefield or the
>various other forums do not hold themselves out to be
>dialogues between players and imms. But the gameplay and ask
>immortal do. I would think the five seconds it takes to reply
>to those (and only those that some other imm hasn't already
>responded to in some way, which is most) is not prohibitive at
>all, and would not in truth really take you away from coding
>or fixing bugs or updating areas or...

Or...I could not post becuase I don't think it's a good idea or a bad idea. It is an idea I'm not going to stand behind and try and get put in the game, but that isn't stopping anyone else from trying to do as much.

>>>I mean, the stated purpose of the forum
>>> gameplay and ask imm) is to discuss and question the game
>>>with _imms_.
>>
>>And lots of posts do get responses. And things that really
>>don't strike chords with someone usually get left alone.
>>
>Yes, exactly. So say so. Perhaps say why. People are taking
>the time to come and post their ideas and thoughts - ideas and
>thoughts you have asked for - because they want to make the
>game better. They don't have to, they could just play. They
>could just look at the battlefield. But they are trying to be
>constructive and helpful. A simple acknowledgement that the
>thought was heard and either accepted or rejected or still
>being considered seems appropriate.

Posting = being heard. We are not going to sit down and write a dissertation as to why every post here is not going to get implemented, or why it's a bad idea, or that we just don't give a #### if it ever gets implemented. Like this post is turning out to be...it's a waste of time.

>>>When people post to those forums I think it
>>>would be good if one of the imms could simply post "Read
>and
>>>taken under advisement." Or "Not going to happen, sorry."
>Or
>>>"Wow, how could we never have thought of that." or
>whatever.
>>
>>
>>I'll make sure to set up an autoposter for me that says
>"Read
>>and circular filed"
>>
>Right. Very open minded and friendly of you. I'm sorry you
>are so angry that you take every opportunity, or in fact just
>create an opportunity, to be mean. My post was neither angry
>nor insulting. I'm hoping yours can be as well.

And yet...it would give you what you want...a response. Learn to read sarcasm.

>>>Just something to show the person it's not in a vacuum.
>>
>

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

>Why would I assume you are talking about me specifically? I
>think you are trying to get under the skin of all immortals,
>not just me.

Judging by how Graatch is phrasing everything, he's clearly trying to provoke negative responses, whether he'd admit it or not. That in itself provokes negative feelings from me, as I hate when people are being such utter asses while veiling it in supposedly civil words.

>As for "the amount of scrutiny it deserves"...In case you
>hadn't noticed, there are enough posts that are hardly
>constructive or just plain assanine, or don't really strike
>anyone on the staff as something they wish to champion and
>push for...and they get the amount of scrutiny they deserve.
>No matter what you hope for, we are not going to respond to
>every single little thing.

Which is why I sometimes play 'clean up crew' and respond to things that don't seem to warrant Immortal responses, yet I think should be made clear in case someone just doesn't get it.

>>>>I've always wondered why you don't reply to each and every
>>>>gameplay and ask immortal post.
>>>
>>>I always wonder why mortals think they are entitled to everything.
>>>
>>I can't speak for all people who play characters but as far as
>>I am concerned, I dont think I am entitled to everything.

You (Graatch) may not think you're entitled to everything, but you certainly act like you're entitled to more than you actually are. I'm honestly amazed that you've gotten any positive attention with this at all.

>>I think I am entitled to whatever the rules say I am entitled
>>to, and in this instance the forum was put up - by you - with
>>the express purpose of discussing game topics with imms.
>
>And we reserve the right not to waste our time.

Exactly. Stating intent to converse with players does not entitle any player to insist on such conversation when no staff member (Immortal) cares to take part. Also, if none care to take part, there's a reason, so quit pushing them and pissing them off. In pissing the staff off, you piss off plenty of the players, and create a general ill will that does nobody any good whatsoever.

>>But again, you are being confrontational and angry for no reason,
>>and making what was a simple question into a fight. You shouldn't.

And here's Graatch assuming he knows how someone else feels and what their motivation is. Honestly, Graatch, perhaps you should analyze your own feelings and motivations, you seem to want an argument.

>You should learn that you aren't going to get a response to
>everything...live with it.
>
>>>>At the very least to note it had been read.

Some reasoning behind this: If you're as actively reading and posting on the forums as Zulgh, Valg, or even myself, just reading takes a huge amount of time. Posting responses just adds to that, no matter how short the response might be. So, in the interest of saving time for more important things, replies are often only made when a reply is absolutely needed, not just when one is asked for.

>>>>When people post to those forums I think it
>>>>would be good if one of the imms could simply post "Read and
>>>>taken under advisement." Or "Not going to happen, sorry." Or
>>>>"Wow, how could we never have thought of that." or whatever.
>>>
>>>I'll make sure to set up an autoposter for me that says "Read
>>>and circular filed"
>>>
>>Right. Very open minded and friendly of you. I'm sorry you
>>are so angry that you take every opportunity, or in fact just
>>create an opportunity, to be mean. My post was neither angry
>>nor insulting. I'm hoping yours can be as well.
>>
>And yet...it would give you what you want...a response. Learn
>to read sarcasm.

Precisely. Another example of Graatch reading emotions that weren't there into Zulghinlour's words. The autopost does what was asked, and in that context would be quite a polite consideration, regardless of how sarcastic the comment about the autoposting might be. It saves time, and gives a response, but isn't exactly useful.

Graatch, quit trying to provoke people, it's not working. I suspect you took a few courses on speaking with people, to the point that you think you can use a few clever words to try and convince them of anything you want. Sorry, no matter how many classes or seminars you attend, it doesn't work how you'd like it to.


---Quislet, tired of people who waste valuable time

not do everything we says directly, by the way I'm bored and I demand a new class, new area..and a big one that is!

Actually I would say that you do a kick ass job and just ignore attention craving persons like Graatch.

I don't mean to be rude, but I think its pretty stupid to post under the old name that the immortals have had cheating issues with. Not that I don't like your idea, in fact I definitely approve. I just wanted to suggest you post under a not-so-infamous name in the future. That way you'll be sure not to have your ideas met with hostility. (even if that hostility is unintentional)

If you weren't banned, ignore me, I was mistaken.

Thanks,
Rade

I was never banned. Some of the imms and I had... issues.

I took a year and a half off from playing. When I returned, with Loborguz and subsequent chars ending most recently with Farnsworth, I did so under a new isp and there was no problem. At least not that I saw.

They now know it was me and I have been reasonably well assured that there will be no negative reprecussions.

Regardless, I know that at least many of the immortals if not all are good enough to recognize a good idea whether it comes from god or the devil.

-Mark

n/t

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

That's a good idea. It also sucks playing goodies that don't obey the law, since nearly all of the damn guards are good aligned.

Ulthur

"Don't worry cutsy buttons. Tonight, dyin's not on the menu!"

- Strong Bad as Dangeresque

Udgaard guards are cool as is.