Hiding titles

[Arman]

I have always thought hiding titles is to the detriment of the descriptive nature of the game. I don't agree hiding titles adds to "the mystery" of guilds or the game.

The original vampyr guild had a title system that was non-optional, as did its layman branch, and I still hold that it neither reduced the mystery of the guild or was detrimental to its membership. If anything it was a game enhancer and inspired the imagination. I think that is the same with a lot of the guilds.

I am supportive of creative titles... quite a few guilds do it... but not in favour of making guild titles optional.

[Amberlee]

I have always thought hiding titles is to the detriment of the descriptive nature of the game. I don't agree hiding titles adds to "the mystery" of guilds or the game.

The original vampyr guild had a title system that was non-optional, as did its layman branch, and I still hold that it neither reduced the mystery of the guild or was detrimental to its membership. If anything it was a game enhancer and inspired the imagination. I think that is the same with a lot of the guilds.

I am supportive of creative titles... quite a few guilds do it... but not in favour of making guild titles optional.

I see what you are getting at here and to some point I agree.
However it does kill a lot of anonymity and mystery of the game.
I am not inherently for or against hiding titles. Personally I prefer hiding my titles as it makes the most sense for me.
What would be nice though is if everyone could in fact make their own title to a certain degree.

[Arman]

I have always thought hiding titles is to the detriment of the descriptive nature of the game. I don't agree hiding titles adds to "the mystery" of guilds or the game.

The original vampyr guild had a title system that was non-optional, as did its layman branch, and I still hold that it neither reduced the mystery of the guild or was detrimental to its membership. If anything it was a game enhancer and inspired the imagination. I think that is the same with a lot of the guilds.

I am supportive of creative titles... quite a few guilds do it... but not in favour of making guild titles optional.

I see what you are getting at here and to some point I agree.
However it does kill a lot of anonymity and mystery of the game.
I am not inherently for or against hiding titles. Personally I prefer hiding my titles as it makes the most sense for me.
What would be nice though is if everyone could in fact make their own title to a certain degree.

Title flexibility is something that a number of guilds have to varying degree... Calians, Dragonarmy, Mercs, SoHM, Secret Society, Morgul Mages allow elements of customisation. Where thematically appropriate that is allowed. If it is something you'd like for your occupational guild, discuss with your wizard guild master who can discuss such ideas with me if they are in favour of such customisation.

But that is different from completely hiding your association.

Anonymity is an interesting point. If I were to invest any time in to re-working the code on whether someone and their association is 'known', I'd be looking at a more sophisticated and scaling system where for example individuals considered 'legendary' or 'mythical' due to their actions throughout the realms are easily recognised simply from their description and recent deeds, or the gossip of npcs, regardless of whether they want to be known or not.

I don't have any intent to invest any time in to such a system, however it does reflect the sort of direction I am in favour of, which is not in the direction of hiding titles.

[Makfly]

I have always thought hiding titles is to the detriment of the descriptive nature of the game. I don't agree hiding titles adds to "the mystery" of guilds or the game.

The original vampyr guild had a title system that was non-optional, as did its layman branch, and I still hold that it neither reduced the mystery of the guild or was detrimental to its membership. If anything it was a game enhancer and inspired the imagination. I think that is the same with a lot of the guilds.

I am supportive of creative titles... quite a few guilds do it... but not in favour of making guild titles optional.

I knew I was talking to a brick wall, but perhaps you could address the issues raised with your stance on this?
You touch on it slightly in terms of anonymity, where you basically say that you agree your stance is counter productive to keeping some things secret, but that don't care to do anything to about it.

What are your thoughts on the fact that your stance, that only Rogue guilds should be able to do this, then simply becomes the proof of what is supposed to be hidden?

What about the non-Rogue guilds that can already hide their titles?
It's hard not to spill guild secrets to counter some of your argument, but if you don't know already, perhaps look into which guilds can actually hide their title, and consider why they can do that.

What are your thoughts on giving the players more freedom of expression, where no title is just as useful in a roleplaying sense as a custom title (I suppose no title could be considered custom in itself).

Also perhaps a few more words on what you actually mean with 'descriptive nature' beyond 'We show words not numbers', if you have the time. Because we clearly don't have the same associations to what is covered by that term.

[Arman]

I have always thought hiding titles is to the detriment of the descriptive nature of the game. I don't agree hiding titles adds to "the mystery" of guilds or the game.

The original vampyr guild had a title system that was non-optional, as did its layman branch, and I still hold that it neither reduced the mystery of the guild or was detrimental to its membership. If anything it was a game enhancer and inspired the imagination. I think that is the same with a lot of the guilds.

I am supportive of creative titles... quite a few guilds do it... but not in favour of making guild titles optional.

I knew I was talking to a brick wall, but perhaps you could address the issues raised with your stance on this?
You touch on it slightly in terms of anonymity, where you basically say that you agree your stance is counter productive to keeping some things secret, but that don't care to do anything to about it.

What are your thoughts on the fact that your stance, that only Rogue guilds should be able to do this, then simply becomes the proof of what is supposed to be hidden?

What about the non-Rogue guilds that can already hide their titles?
It's hard not to spill guild secrets to counter some of your argument, but if you don't know already, perhaps look into which guilds can actually hide their title, and consider why they can do that.

What are your thoughts on giving the players more freedom of expression, where no title is just as useful in a roleplaying sense as a custom title (I suppose no title could be considered custom in itself).

Also perhaps a few more words on what you actually mean with 'descriptive nature' beyond 'We show words not numbers', if you have the time. Because we clearly don't have the same associations to what is covered by that term.

Sorry, I didn't realise engaging and providing my position meant I was a brick wall. I'd normally be happy to provide more detail on my thoughts, but based on your antagonistic responses I don't feel any desire or obligation to.

[Riva]

Calians, Dragonarmy, Mercs, SoHM, Secret Society, Morgul Mages

Only one of those, the Secret Society, is a "rogue" guild, though. Doesn't that render the argument that it's a rogue guild feature a bit moot? I don't disagree that those guilds should have features like that, I just think more guilds should have options. Especially rogue guilds which rely on RP to function in their rogue role. Don't get me wrong, I understand the counter argument to that being "If you're sneaking around and stabbing people in the back your affiliation is obvious" but that's why I mentioned social stealth, being stealthy in roleplay, as important.

[Makfly]

Sorry, I didn't realise engaging and providing my position meant I was a brick wall. I'd normally be happy to provide more detail on my thoughts, but based on your antagonistic responses I don't feel any desire or obligation to.

A brick wall in terms of being able to break through with anything that might make you reconsider your stance - In other words, I knew I wasn't going to be able to change your mind.
But you (or anyone) shouldn't feel obligated to do anything. It's just a forum and nobody owes anyone anything here.

[Amberlee]

I have always thought hiding titles is to the detriment of the descriptive nature of the game. I don't agree hiding titles adds to "the mystery" of guilds or the game.

The original vampyr guild had a title system that was non-optional, as did its layman branch, and I still hold that it neither reduced the mystery of the guild or was detrimental to its membership. If anything it was a game enhancer and inspired the imagination. I think that is the same with a lot of the guilds.

I am supportive of creative titles... quite a few guilds do it... but not in favour of making guild titles optional.

I see what you are getting at here and to some point I agree.
However it does kill a lot of anonymity and mystery of the game.
I am not inherently for or against hiding titles. Personally I prefer hiding my titles as it makes the most sense for me.
What would be nice though is if everyone could in fact make their own title to a certain degree.

Title flexibility is something that a number of guilds have to varying degree... Calians, Dragonarmy, Mercs, SoHM, Secret Society, Morgul Mages allow elements of customisation. Where thematically appropriate that is allowed. If it is something you'd like for your occupational guild, discuss with your wizard guild master who can discuss such ideas with me if they are in favour of such customisation.

But that is different from completely hiding your association.

Anonymity is an interesting point. If I were to invest any time in to re-working the code on whether someone and their association is 'known', I'd be looking at a more sophisticated and scaling system where for example individuals considered 'legendary' or 'mythical' due to their actions throughout the realms are easily recognised simply from their description and recent deeds, or the gossip of npcs, regardless of whether they want to be known or not.

I don't have any intent to invest any time in to such a system, however it does reflect the sort of direction I am in favour of, which is not in the direction of hiding titles.

That would be a very cool feature to be honest.
And yeah time is an issue for most people as most of us are adult and actually have lives now, unlike 20 years ago

[Arman]

Calians, Dragonarmy, Mercs, SoHM, Secret Society, Morgul Mages

Only one of those, the Secret Society, is a "rogue" guild, though. Doesn't that render the argument that it's a rogue guild feature a bit moot? I don't disagree that those guilds should have features like that, I just think more guilds should have options. Especially rogue guilds which rely on RP to function in their rogue role. Don't get me wrong, I understand the counter argument to that being "If you're sneaking around and stabbing people in the back your affiliation is obvious" but that's why I mentioned social stealth, being stealthy in roleplay, as important.

Those are examples of title flexibilty... not incognito. My view is incognito should be reserved for rogue occupational and layman guilds. Clearly there are guilds that don't follow those principles like the mercs or AA. If they were being coded now I wouldn't allow it. Do I think the inconsistency in application of these principles warrants me to go change them? No. I don't like it, but I also don't think it is game breaking. But I am definitely not in favour of it being a global feature.

Much like the Morgul Mage titles that are in Black Speech. There is a coding principle that has been around as long as the game has been in existence that descriptives like titles should be in English. They shouldn't have been added if those principles were followed. For the majority those titles are meaningless and add nothing in describing the character. Having said that the liege of the Middle Earth domains disagrees and I don't feel so strongly that it should be removed. But I wouldn't allow that sort of titling system in new guilds.

Embrace the inconsistencies!

[Riva]

Thank you for taking the time to respond, Arman. I understand your position better now and see why things are the way they are.