Couple things I wanted to talk about.

1. Group of three is best for learning. Every Theran knows this, but why would larger groups not be ok? We have two types of players when it comes to leveling (I think). The soloist perfectionist and the race-to-hero.

Why should the maximum group limit for optimum learning be extended? Well, lots of times it seems folks have trouble finding a group and sometimes it is because all three of the other people in their range are in a group already. Why not let this person join to make it a 4-person group, with 3-person group experience values?

It would be harder to kill someone in a larger group like that, so attacking ranking groups becomes harder. Perhaps, but we also have anti-gang code. Is it better to attack a group of 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 people with this code in place? The PKiller may actually prefer bigger groups too!

I don't have any problems with it as-is, but I don't play mages or things that are sub-optimal in a group and/or can't solo.

2. Know alignment.

My least favorite thing people ask me is "What path do I walk?" Well, I'm walking eastern road right now you ####. Pet peeve, I know. I just hate the dancing around the alignment question and I prefer that part be skipped altogether. Or... Why not just ask "What is your alignment?"

Sounds almost worse at first. It grates on the nerves and screams OOC right? What I'm considering is... does it? Healers have a supplication: "know alignment." Therans know this supplication exists and therefore must know that alignment exists and most likely what their alignment is. Why can't we and/or don't we just ask "Hey bro, what is your alignment?" Cuts down on contrived nonsense and gets straight to the point, while not limited Mr. Purist's ability to find only goodies to rank with or whatever.

Good day.

feed an orphan or eat an orphan?

I would like to see bigger ranking groups. Ranking is a pretty large chunk of a character's life, I wouldn't mind seeing more people involved in it. I also like the thought of more lowbie groups erupting into political problems, pre-induction. I had no idea that guy was a filthy Nexun postulant.

1. Not really sure that having 4 person groups more often is a good thing. But I really have no idea. Maybe it would be a good idea to increase the amounts for 2person and 4 person groups.

2. A character may understand that others are aligned as they are but there are so many other ways to explain that you think alike or to deceive someone otherwise. Blatantly asking what someone's alignment is crossing the OOC bounds. "What path do you walk?" Is not amazing but people could do worse. You can promote better ways IC of getting to that point by interacting with others. You might even start a good trend.

And along that same vein, I would think it is hilarious if someone made a gnome (or other wise race) that had snarky and/or definitively correct responses. More of a: "The eastern road, I think. You humans name your roads oddly. What if I am East of the Eastern road? Hm? Then it is a road to the West. Did they ever think of that?" And ramble on like that. Not really be an ass about it...but more being curious and gnome-like. Then again, if you are a gnome other players already know your alignment so that is not a perfect example for this.

>1. Not really sure that having 4 person groups more often is
>a good thing. But I really have no idea. Maybe it would be a
>good idea to increase the amounts for 2person and 4 person
>groups.

Yeah was just a random thought more than anything. I know some people recently have asked me to group and I've already been in a group with the only other people online they could group with. Feels bad, since I like to pickup anyone who asks, regardless of what I'm doing.

>2. A character may understand that others are aligned as they
>are but there are so many other ways to explain that you think
>alike or to deceive someone otherwise. Blatantly asking what
>someone's alignment is crossing the OOC bounds. "What path do
>you walk?" Is not amazing but people could do worse. You can
>promote better ways IC of getting to that point by interacting
>with others. You might even start a good trend.

I have always considered it completely ooc too, but the existence of "know alignment" makes it quite IC. Can't really argue that since auras exist and a supplication called "know alignment" is there. At least, that is the thought process I'm contemplating. I agree and do promote better ways of getting to the matter IC and I do give snarky responses to the terrible ones, though generally I still give them the information they are really looking for.

>And along that same vein, I would think it is hilarious if
>someone made a gnome (or other wise race) that had snarky
>and/or definitively correct responses. More of a: "The eastern
>road, I think. You humans name your roads oddly. What if I
>am East of the Eastern road? Hm? Then it is a road to the
>West. Did they ever think of that?" And ramble on like that.
>Not really be an ass about it...but more being curious and
>gnome-like. Then again, if you are a gnome other players
>already know your alignment so that is not a perfect example
>for this.

Heh, I like it. I played a neutral/neutral dwarf sphere greed once and someone asked me what path I seek or whatever dumb thing. I responded "The path that leads to gold!" They thought I meant goodie and attacked me. Then we grouped and had some laughs.

Know alignment is an old D&D spell and is fairly well known and does exactly what it says... As far as I am aware the character does not say "know alignment" when they cast it. It is just what the spell is called for you as a player. So really the only people that "know alignment" are priests and it could go by some other divination name if it really bothers you. But you would have to convince one of the coders that it is important enough to fix instead of whatever else they are working on. I do not really see a problem with the spell and do not really see a reason for it to change, imo.

I think those are two very different things, but I see the point of the name of the supp just being a throw back not worth spending time on fixing. That's why I keep it at a thought of "why not?" instead of "HEY LETS ALL ASK ALIGNMENT!"

I like to tailor my characters to be as much a part of the CF world as possible. Spheres can absolutely be talked about in character. You can go to the Lyceum and study spheres as well as where the spheres are located sort of like the explanation of yggdrasil in norse mythology. It very much exists and is something a character can know, but it is arcane knowledge that most probably don't talk about. Gods have power of certain spheres and that is knowledge that is known to characters in the game. It is not an out of character thing at all.

The only thing that makes asking someone "What is your alignment" sound out of character is the the word alignment itself. Everyone still asks each other, they just cover it with different words meaning the same thing. Everyone in Thera, the characters themselves, know what alignment is via auras, know alignment, detect evil, detect good. You can get some of these in potion form, that when you lore (that is, use your characters knowledge to know what the thing does) it says it casts "detect evil." I don't see any reason why these spells should be imagined as being called something else, when they aren't.

You should probably know that I agree with you. I do not like to, nor do I want people to ask "What is your alignment," the problem is after questioning myself on the subject... I just don't know WHY I feel like that. I want convincing that I can't find for myself. You have not convinced me of my own view being correct, and I'm going to need you to try harder .

The throwback idea is a good/close one, but doesn't quite fit the bill. It sounds more like another contrivance of the community.

Your alignment is a stat on your character sheet. Just like it is in D&D. So just as you can ask how strong someone is, you also can ask them what their str stat is. The former can be IC and the latter is entirely OOC.

So just like any stat, you should not be asking directly about the stat itself. But it is fine to acquire a relative idea of the stat from their interactions. "Do you want to go slaughter elves?" And all the other variants of such.

To clarify about sphere, I was essentially saying someone asking "What is your sphere?". Just as your example of "hey bro, what is your alignment?"

I also want to add that the depth of this game can vary between each individual. Just as you say, a character can cast 'detect evil' or they can be 'blessed to see the taint of the darkness by the will of the Skyborn so that they might smite the evil lurking in Thera' for example. Either view is fine but one is much more fun, imo.

Better?

In fact. I think I'll take it.

Gotchya, on matters of the sphere part of the discussion. See what you were getting at I mean.

"Either view is fine but one is much more fun, imo."

That's the key. It's more fun to ignore the fact that it is detect evil/good/know alignment and add flavor to it based on your character.

So now I have a good reason for me to continue in my ways AND I don't have to be so annoyed by someone not going as far with.

Good talk.