I'll get right to it after a short exposition. As a pet-using class, such as a Warlock or a Death Knight, you, the player, can emote out the actions of your pet freely. You can make your ghoul lash out at things, chew on a table leg, or make your Voidwalker give hugs to people. Happy fun times.
This is done perfectly freely. You, a player, emote the actions of a bound servant. /cheer!
However, once you wish to give someone else control over the bound servant, they have to post a Special Profile before even creating the character.
This is where I was stumped. Why? It's simple. All you're really doing is giving someone else the opportunity to emote the very same creature that you had been emoting up to that moment in time in which you decided to relinquish control of your pet to another.
What does it matter if -I-, the owner of the pet, or someone else whom I trust enough to understand the pet, emotes it? Why can I do it freely, but someone else needs to go through lengthy approval?
Umm. I understand if pets could get a bit of background to them, but the most they could get is a Companion page, not a whole Profile... What's the big difference if I or another emotes a bunch of pixels?
...So, that's it. CoTH, I need some help understanding this rule. I've seen Ghouls played out before the Restart a ton before actually submitting a profile(A normal one, note), and being bumped to 80.
Thanks in advance, for helping to clear up this little dilemma of my mind, and I apologise in advance if my words strike chords or spark animosity. I assure you it is not my intention to create conflict. Instead, I wish to solve this little jumbled mess in my mind. All rules have a reason behind them, no?
That does seem a bit redundant. I don't see why it would be a big deal.
I see it as the same reasons why prestige classes are being kept at a lengthy and somewhat difficult OOC process to go through. It ensures the quality of the character and that somebody isn't just doing it as a quick spur of the moment thing or doesn't know/understand the core material that is going to be backing the character.
I feel like the process should be sped up, as being unable to play a character for a month can cause some issues ICly, but otherwise should be kept in tact.
Ah, but you see, Abishua, the very same characters IC-ly, can be emoted out/Roleplayed by the Warlock/DK to which they are bound, -without- having to submit a special profile.
It's the exact same thing, with a different person doing the typing on a keyboard...
Quote:Ah, but you see, Abishua, the very same characters IC-ly, can be emoted out/Roleplayed by the Warlock/DK to which they are bound, -without- having to submit a special profile.
It's the exact same thing, with a different person doing the typing on a keyboard...
The difference is that those classes have access to controlling their pets and it's a core part of their character (assuming their character uses the pet). The pet cannot emote for itself, so the master is forced to emote for ghoul. The difference is that your ghoul (or pet) cannot be online without you online, or act independently from yourself.
My ghoul's master hasn't been online for a while, but he still roams the catacombs waiting for his master's call. There's a lot of power in that independence that comes with having another player control your ghoul. ICly, there shouldn't be a difference, but there are tangible benefits due to OOC limitations.
It also opens up very complex actions being carried out by the minion at the master's bidding, which could not be carried out as easily with only a single person. For example, you can command your ghoul to protect a specific character, then walk off to the nearest bar to get drunk as your ghoul stands guard.
Take it as you will, but that's the reasoning I have behind it. Also, it's a special non standard race character, which requires approval to play. Once again, to assure high quality and conformity to the lore set out to back the character.
It's because those creatures are not normally playable races. As a result, they require a spesh profile.
Like a felguard.
Ah, good old independence. Try this:
Warlock summons Voidwalker. Warlock tells voidwalker to guard a specific person. Warlock IC-ly goes off for a drink.
Warlock OOC-ly puts on /DND tag. Warlock RPs their Voidlwalker, emoting for it, guarding the person. But the Warlock is -not- IC-ly, there. He's just there to provide the physical presence of the demon. And he is RP-ing it.
Same for a Death Knight's Ghoul. Kynra tells Sevith to eat x corpse. Kynra flies off IC-ly. Kynra remains OOC-ly, with a /DND tag on, emoting Sevith eating the corpse.
(Sorry for the example.)
Quote:Ah, good old independence. Try this:
Warlock summons Voidwalker. Warlock tells voidwalker to guard a specific person. Warlock IC-ly goes off for a drink.
Warlock OOC-ly puts on /DND tag. Warlock RPs their Voidlwalker, emoting for it, guarding the person. But the Warlock is -not- IC-ly, there. He's just there to provide the physical presence of the demon. And he is RP-ing it.
Same for a Death Knight's Ghoul. Kynra tells Sevith to eat x corpse. Kynra flies off IC-ly. Kynra remains OOC-ly, with a /DND tag on, emoting Sevith eating the corpse.
(Sorry for the example.)
Aha, but you brought up the issue within your examples. While the pets can ICly do something independent, OOCly it doesn't happen. The Death Knight/Warlock are actually there playing their pet, where their master character cannot be in the bar interacting with others.
It's an OOC limitation on the independence.
Edit:
A second thought is that when the master is doing emotes about the ghoul (or pet), the ghoul is a secondary character, where when a player is playing said character it is the primary character. There is a bit of a difference, but I can't seem to articulate it now.
It's a combination of things.
1. They're non-standard races, with powers and looks contrary to the standard races.
2. Demons especially tend to be a magnet for Mary Sue characters. All of the companions/pets/minions also tend to be played very poorly by the masses, as Retail proves.
3. In terms of character "power", a Warlock with a pet succubus is as strong as any non-pet class, no more. A PC demon pet is stronger (especially in terms of roll fights) than an NPC one.
4. A PC demon has a lot more independence. The counter-example provided is foiled by the fact that Warlocks still need to be within a certain proximity of their demon, OOCly if nothing else.
5. We don't want people playing ghouls/demons that are not bound to another player.
6. This is a concept we've only recently been trying out, especially as it pertains to Warlocks. Wuvvums, I believe, is the only current player with a demon character, and we're watching her to ensure that no problems come up as a result of this.
Hmm. I see, that clears a lot of it up. Alright, I think I get it now.
Thanks to everyone that answered the thread!