The following warnings occurred:
Warning [2] Undefined variable $search_thread - Line: 60 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 60 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval
Warning [2] Undefined variable $forumjump - Line: 89 - File: showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code PHP 8.1.27 (Linux)
File Line Function
/inc/class_error.php 153 errorHandler->error
/showthread.php(1617) : eval()'d code 89 errorHandler->error_callback
/showthread.php 1617 eval




Grakor Grumbles: Subraces
#16
A lot of points have already been properly assessed, and I'll just try and point something out.

Yes, allowing High Elves will definitely cause an increase in Alliance activity, and a respective decrease in Horde activity. It's how things are - if you're in a supermarket, you'll always go for the goods that have the flashy, comic book-esque "NEW" signs strapped onto their boxes. However!~

You could do a similar thing for the Horde. Instead of making an exception for High Elves, you could allow, perhaps, Forest Trolls? Or the Mag'har? I'm not well versed in what's allowed and what's not on CotH lately (I've been away for a good while), but from what I recall, these were always problematic. So, why not give the equal amplifications of choice for both factions?

If that doesn't work, you could always do something else, something in the lines of creating an awesome RP area, perhaps hosting some events which will spark up the creation of Horde-oriented guilds, or something of the like. I don't think this problem is as big as everyone suggests, and I agree with @"Xigo"'s, @"Reigen"'s and @"Sorum"'s as well as yours, @"Grakor456", but I kind of feel that you don't have to take anything away to balance things out. Adding works just fine, too!

edIT: Just found out about this. It's precisely what I meant when I said that the Horde should be engaged a bit more.
"Good roleplaying is not equivalent to saying that your character is not interested or molded for a certain situation.
Quite the contrary - good roleplaying is making up a reason for your character to do that thing, no matter the obstacles!"
Reply
#17
@Kirabo, although this thread is dominated by High Elf discussion, Grakor mentioned in the OP that they are considering all kinds of sub-races. It definitely wouldn't be limited to High Elves, even if they were allowed.

How will females of certain sub-races be handled, such as Taunka? Will they be disallowed due to the lack of representation?
Reply
#18
I understand, and I tried to point out to specific Horde races which weren't allowed before, and were in the same situation as the High Elves. I've stated that I've no idea if such a thing exists, and if it does, which race it is exactly.
"Good roleplaying is not equivalent to saying that your character is not interested or molded for a certain situation.
Quite the contrary - good roleplaying is making up a reason for your character to do that thing, no matter the obstacles!"
Reply
#19
Thanks for the positive changes, Grakor and co.!
[Image: RtK7PiZ.png]
Reply
#20
I imagine the female Taunka will be allowed. They don't have a different model that I'm aware of, however, so there won't be a model change. They weren't permitted before because the males were excluded due to their special model.
Reply
#21
I'm assuming they would have the same per-account limit, though, no? Sure, it has no model change, but it would feel unfair for those who would rather play a male. At any rate, this (possible) change makes me happy... I might even roll a Taunka myself!
Reply
#22
Nah, they would still be one-per person because they're still a different subrace (with a different culture, background, the works; it's different enough to warrant the special treatment right alongside their special-model friends). This is less about the models specifically and more about the subraces, but with the option of opening up the models of the subraces that look radically different from the main race. Such as forest trolls.

@Thoradin: Speaking of forest trolls. What we'll most likely do for them is to give the Forest Troll model and let people do the same as they do with, say, Humans and Blood Elves. "This character is thinner than the model shows". Many of the base races are already ridiculously bulky, but Forest Trolls are especially so. There's a pretty dramatic difference between your standard Forest Troll and Jungle Troll, so if you want to pass for a more lanky variant then you'll have to put that in your description like others do with their characters. The subraces are different and we'll establish that with the special models, if this goes through. (Like mentioned in the other thread about the CMCs, the lanky models are a result of an emulator error.)
Reply
#23
(02-03-2014, 09:00 AM)Loxmardin Wrote: Nah, they would still be one-per person because they're still a different subrace (with a different culture, background, the works; it's different enough to warrant the special treatment right alongside their special-model friends). This is less about the models specifically and more about the subraces, but with the option of opening up the models of the subraces that look radically different from the main race. Such as forest trolls.

@Thoradin: Speaking of forest trolls. What we'll most likely do for them is to give the Forest Troll model and let people do the same as they do with, say, Humans and Blood Elves. "This character is thinner than the model shows". Many of the base races are already ridiculously bulky, but Forest Trolls are especially so. There's a pretty dramatic difference between your standard Forest Troll and Jungle Troll, so if you want to pass for a more lanky variant then you'll have to put that in your description like others do with their characters. The subraces are different and we'll establish that with the special models, if this goes through. (Like mentioned in the other thread about the CMCs, the lanky models are a result of an emulator error.)

But Lox, the entire reason I am, well, fighting against having to do the CMC thing is that it kills the customization. As I've stated a couple times in here and on the Gen Disc thread; Forest Trolls (and by extension Ice Trolls) are easily enough convey through emotes. If they are flat out given the models then the player can no longer use armor, tabards, or anything of the like. That sub-race is then, also, needlessly restricted for something seen frequently with their faction all over.

I recently purchased a month of retail and discovered that, yes, the trolls that Cerb had found were lanky because of an emulation error. I'll go on and admit that, but what I will show is that Forest Trolls, at least, are not as rare as one would believe. I know this has become a somewhat personal issue, as I have a Forest Troll I would like to be able to play, but it does not change the fact that they are in the Horde, outside of the Hinterlands. In fact, in Stonetalon, there are Forest Trolls that are part of Krom'gar's Army.

Spoiler:
[Image: fizhTyx.jpg]
Spoiler:
[Image: oA0ITv3.jpg]



Essentially what I am arguing for is at least the choice of having the Forest/Ice Troll model. They are similar enough to establish your being one through the Scale command and emotes. The Same can arguably said about Taunka, as it is just the face that is different. Broken are an entirely separate thing, as they are extremely different than base model Draenei. My point being is that if this is the decision the team is making, at least give players the ability to choose if they want the CMC or not. I would much rather, like other characters, just use emotes to show my troll's bulkiness, not be forced to use some model I can't customize or even want to look at.

Let me list a couple of sub-races that are, currently, freely playable:

Highborne (Yes, they are a sub-race)
Wildhammers
Dark Irons
Blackrocks
Dragonmaws
Sand Trolls


Thanks for reading.





Please ignore the goofy avatar, as this is an incredibly serious post.
Do you have what it takes to join the Fighting Blues?
Do you have what it takes to defend your homeland?
Will you stand up in defense of the innocent? The weak?
Will you stand up in defense of Justice and the Law?

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRVE3uy8TjirssygDEKMi2...Ia13_WYQpw]



Reply
#24
(02-03-2014, 12:46 PM)Thoradin Wrote: Essentially what I am arguing for is at least the choice of having the Forest/Ice Troll model. They are similar enough to establish your being one through the Scale command and emotes. The Same can arguably said about Taunka, as it is just the face that is different. Broken are an entirely separate thing, as they are extremely different than base model Draenei. My point being is that if this is the decision the team is making, at least give players the ability to choose if they want the CMC or not. I would much rather, like other characters, just use emotes to show my troll's bulkiness, not be forced to use some model I can't customize or even want to look at.

Right, here's the thing. Yes, you could theoretically use emotes to display your specific subrace, but then that reaches the point of relying on the player in question to essentially type "/me is totes a forest troll, for you new guys" every time someone new enters the RP. Not only is that tiring, people are bound to forget to post that and it creates spam for others when they do. Again, the point is to promote readability of character models, as without that we may as well be playing on a purely text-based medium without the unique advantages text-based mediums give. Otherwise, scale can only do so much: forest trolls are just as tall as jungle trolls, just bulkier and a different facial structure.

Similarly, no one is saying that forest trolls aren't relatively common in the Horde. They're about the same as ogres by my estimation, and I would have opened up ogres under the same policies as we're considering doing for forest trolls if it wasn't for Kretol giving us a flat "no" on the matter.

Let me say I'm currently finding this thread rather disheartening and frustrating to look at. We've heard the complaints about a number of our restrictions and have been working on loosening them while still following our desired goals (in this case, readability of models.) What we get in return from a number (though thankfully not all, thank you everyone else) of sources is staunch opposition because things are not precisely as they want them to be, without any shred of support for the positives coming from these changes. I'm sorry that things aren't precisely the way you want them to be, but compromise is a two-way street. If you're not willing to compromise and are only going to be satisfied with your specific vision of what you think is ideal...well, I'm sorry, but you're probably going to be disappointed.
Have you hugged an orc today?
- I am not tech support. Please do not contact me regarding technical issues. -
Reply
#25
I like it, personally.

For my two cents on the High Elf bit, if it were to be done, I think the GM team would have to lose it's fear of denying something. I personally think that the GM team dropped the ball on Demon Hunters with how many of them were allowed, and I would hate it if something similar were to happen. So, I think if something like this were to happen, the GM team would really have to step up and not be afraid of denying profiles if it's getting to be obnoxious.

I personally wouldn't have a problem with a number cap, provided that you make sure that the people who have a High Elf are active. You haven't played the High Elf in a month (completely arbitrary number)? Alright, then it's revoked. You can reapply for one when you think that RP for the character has become prevalent again. I can understand that the server doesn't want to get involved in players and how they play their characters. However, I think that with something as rare as a High Elf, it should definitely have a higher amount of GM oversight than what I've seen before.
Reply
#26
Side Note Rubbish.
Spoiler:
I'd really like someone to explain the differences between the troll ethnicities some day. Because it seems like they're not different personality-wise, just different physically and religiously.
Quote:[8:53AM] Cassius: Xigo is the best guy ever. he doesn't afraid of anything.
Reply
#27
To play a High elf, I feel that a character's recent history would have to revolve around the reason why they aren't a blood elf, and the experiences they have for that reason. If these aren't highly relevant in a character, that's like playing an undead character who likes cute things and trees and puppies.
As someone who plays a nature-loving Forsaken, I will attest that the unlikely is possible for a character, but can be difficult to do well, both due to needing competent RP skills and good happenstance to pull off well.

Maybe with High Elves, and maybe sub-races in general should have a review period after a month or so of being approved? I mean this as much for the staff as it is for the player. I know CMCs can get deactivated after a time of inactivity, but I feel that maybe the failures and/or shortcomings of an inactive unusual character should be directly addressed so that the staff can better understand the big picture of CMC-type characters.

Is their character too dependent on a certain type of RP? Did their player's computer explode? How is the responce (IC and OoCly) to the character's race affecting your RP experience?

In particular, I feel this should be asked, even if a character has remained in active use: "Has the tone of the character turned out in a way that the subspecies of a character just isn't relevant enough to make it worth it?" Even if someone sets out to make a High Elf whose internal conflict revolves around not being a belf, things may change or fade into the background in practice. A Helf character just may honestly be better off being retconned into a human, blood elf, or even gnome. I can definitely see this happening with most other sub-races, as well, and there's no shame in it.
Reply
#28
As an expansion to the in-account mini-CMCs, how about allowing things that usually wouldn't quite fit with a full-blown CMC due to their lack of true sentience? I'm thinking characters like the more intelligent bears and wolves of elven forests, treants, minor elementals, etc., though I'm sure that there's much more that fits. I'd imagine these to be something akin to the temporary event CMCs that we have, but are used to enhance RP that's already occurring rather than create more... RP tends to hover around a certain area in phases, and (if approved promptly) minor CMCs like this would enhance it greatly if used carefully, I think.

It's an idea that needs refinement, for sure. Thoughts?
[Image: RtK7PiZ.png]
Reply
#29
...I like this. But, exactly which species are we talking about that can pass off as semi intelligent?
Perhaps it is your imperfection that which grants you free will, that allows you to persevere against cosmically calculated odds. You prevailed where the Titans' own perfect creations have failed.

- Algalon, The Observer
Reply
#30
(02-05-2014, 04:08 PM)Zhaei Wrote: As an expansion to the in-account mini-CMCs, how about allowing things that usually wouldn't quite fit with a full-blown CMC due to their lack of true sentience? I'm thinking characters like the more intelligent bears and wolves of elven forests, treants, minor elementals, etc., though I'm sure that there's much more that fits. I'd imagine these to be something akin to the temporary event CMCs that we have, but are used to enhance RP that's already occurring rather than create more... RP tends to hover around a certain area in phases, and (if approved promptly) minor CMCs like this would enhance it greatly if used carefully, I think.

It's an idea that needs refinement, for sure. Thoughts?

It's a neat idea to consider while already making reforms to the cmc policy, but... Well, it's very broad. Can you come up with a mission statement or an otherwise sound and clear reason for this sort of addition? Definitions and such make it a whole lot easier to build rules. Here's a few questions to help you refine the concept:

1. How is this different from applying for a normal CMC of the same beast in question? (I presume you're implying that creatures lacking certain intelligence and power levels are less prone to abuse, and thus don't warrant as much caution?)
Why should the staff consider this suggestion when they've generally eschewed non-sapient creatures in past CMC polity?
If these creatures lack typical intelligence,what standards should they be held to, in terms of characterization?

As another note, you've listed a variety of intelligence levels there, and while I do feel that rules pertaining to intelligent wilderness should be laid out clearly, an ent or elemental would probably be near the level of some races already approved for CMCs, like abominations and murlocs. (no offense to fish and deaders. ;) )
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Grakor Grumbles: Race/Class Expansions Grakor456 115 17,338 09-10-2014, 02:17 PM
Last Post: Kretol
  Grakor Grumbles: Spirit Companions Grakor456 20 4,190 08-19-2013, 04:07 AM
Last Post: Nikodemos
  Grakor Grumbles: Heights and Weights Grakor456 31 5,919 07-26-2013, 07:52 AM
Last Post: Loxmardin
  Grakor Grumbles: Custom Server Lore Grakor456 26 5,332 07-23-2013, 11:59 PM
Last Post: Reigen
  Grakor Grumbles: Sexual RP Policy Grakor456 112 18,735 07-17-2013, 10:22 AM
Last Post: Nymus



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)