I never took part in the cabal uprising a while ago but I've always been interested in them. I suspect I have the same reason as all the other people who didn't bother, they weren't made official. Now that magic is practically complete again, and things are starting to fall in place, I think in a few weeks when valdrik gets back we should push for recognition once more. Valdrik said he was planning to work on elemental specialization, which to me it seems is essentially what cabals are, and since they have been lingering around so long it would make sense to implement them in some way.
As much as I dislike comparing things with other guilds it is hard not to take a look at moon mages and their sects, which are basically their version of cabals. They are dotted across elanthia, each with their own history, pre and post titles, spell bonuses, and cantrips which mostly require a small quest but are far superior to our own. These traits all add depth and a sense of direction for the people that wish to follow them, which to me is a highly desireable notion, and I feel the warrior mage guild would benfit greatly from such things.
~Sardric~
Don't cut the cabal on 12/21/2002 03:01 AM CST
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/23/2002 12:21 AM CST
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/23/2002 02:47 AM CST
Back when hyram was guru he advised us all to push toward bringing cabals in to being, because if they started out as player-run then it would be a good base to start making them official. That was the uprising, when everyone started joining cabals and working on them etc. But it died.
~Sardric~
~Sardric~
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/25/2002 05:27 PM CST
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/27/2002 05:46 AM CST
>>because hyram said they wouldnt be offical<<
Yep exactly. He meant well really, but I guess something got in the way of progress. I don't think we were ever informed of the exact reason why cabals weren't to become official though. Now, I've noticed that this thread isn't getting a great deal of attention, which is fair enough, that's the way the boards work, but I implore you as warrior mages to make one last stand for cabals. I'm not talking about protesting, rioting, PvP, PvGM, PvWhatever.. I'm talking about questioning Valdrik (no, not like the spanish inquisition ;P) or whomever it may concern, and showing that there is a widespread interest. Even if it doesn't work, at least we tried, and at least we'll know where we stand. I know I'm not the only Warrior Mage that cares about it.
~Sardric~
Yep exactly. He meant well really, but I guess something got in the way of progress. I don't think we were ever informed of the exact reason why cabals weren't to become official though. Now, I've noticed that this thread isn't getting a great deal of attention, which is fair enough, that's the way the boards work, but I implore you as warrior mages to make one last stand for cabals. I'm not talking about protesting, rioting, PvP, PvGM, PvWhatever.. I'm talking about questioning Valdrik (no, not like the spanish inquisition ;P) or whomever it may concern, and showing that there is a widespread interest. Even if it doesn't work, at least we tried, and at least we'll know where we stand. I know I'm not the only Warrior Mage that cares about it.
~Sardric~
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/27/2002 05:49 AM CST
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/27/2002 01:07 PM CST
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/27/2002 06:09 PM CST
I think there is a broad interesting in cabals with all Warrior Mages its an interesting twist to the guild that would allow us to diversify instead of just being the same old, same old. However without GM support its an uphill battle for sure, Cabals would be similar to sects and are historically accurate to the game. Why they are not supported is beyond me, i mean its one thing to say "not yet guys, we need to work on other things" and entirely another to say "nope, sorry guys, we're never gonna do it". ::sigh::
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/27/2002 08:17 PM CST
<<I think there is a broad interesting in cabals with all Warrior Mages
Then I'll correct your misconception. I'm not interested in them at all, and in fact oppose guild development staff resources being directed to such 'fringe' endeavors. Man-hours spent coding for the guild should be to the benefit of the whole guild, not one elemental fan club at a time.
Then I'll correct your misconception. I'm not interested in them at all, and in fact oppose guild development staff resources being directed to such 'fringe' endeavors. Man-hours spent coding for the guild should be to the benefit of the whole guild, not one elemental fan club at a time.
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/27/2002 10:04 PM CST
>>I think there is a broad interesting in cabals with all Warrior Mages
>>Then I'll correct your misconception. I'm not interested in them at all
I don't think you represent the interest of the entire guild quite yet, Mike, broad or otherwise.
As to what the WM team decides is or isn't worth development probably won't be run past you for approval either.
Porlock
>>Then I'll correct your misconception. I'm not interested in them at all
I don't think you represent the interest of the entire guild quite yet, Mike, broad or otherwise.
As to what the WM team decides is or isn't worth development probably won't be run past you for approval either.
Porlock
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/28/2002 12:02 AM CST
>>I'm not interested in them at all
Heh, Nevy=Guild majority.
Actually, though, I'd have to agree with your sentiment that most of the guild isn't interested in Cabals. I don't even know if there are a majority of mages on the forums who favor cabals, and I believe if you just randomly asked most of the War Mages if they favored making Cabals a GM-sponsored thing they wouldn't know what you were talking about. Cabals were a forum phenomenon and I wouldn't be surprised if under 10% of the non-forum reading players have ever heard of a Cabal in terms of our Guild.
Plus with the Magic re-write, the way spells are being chosen have changed. I personally don't have more than 3 spells in any one book and am more a follower of funtionality and economy than any particular element.
~Katrenos
Heh, Nevy=Guild majority.
Actually, though, I'd have to agree with your sentiment that most of the guild isn't interested in Cabals. I don't even know if there are a majority of mages on the forums who favor cabals, and I believe if you just randomly asked most of the War Mages if they favored making Cabals a GM-sponsored thing they wouldn't know what you were talking about. Cabals were a forum phenomenon and I wouldn't be surprised if under 10% of the non-forum reading players have ever heard of a Cabal in terms of our Guild.
Plus with the Magic re-write, the way spells are being chosen have changed. I personally don't have more than 3 spells in any one book and am more a follower of funtionality and economy than any particular element.
~Katrenos
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/28/2002 12:23 AM CST
<<I don't think you represent the interest of the entire guild quite yet, Mike, broad or otherwise.
Nope, and I never claimed to. However, the statement I was responding to seemed to assert a belief that there was a broad interest in cabals amoung all warrior mages. And while I can't speak for the rest of the guild, I can most certainly render any 'all warrior mages' into an 'all warrior mages but one' in the very least. :-P
<<As to what the WM team decides is or isn't worth development probably won't be run past you for approval either.
Rats.
Nope, and I never claimed to. However, the statement I was responding to seemed to assert a belief that there was a broad interest in cabals amoung all warrior mages. And while I can't speak for the rest of the guild, I can most certainly render any 'all warrior mages' into an 'all warrior mages but one' in the very least. :-P
<<As to what the WM team decides is or isn't worth development probably won't be run past you for approval either.
Rats.
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/28/2002 12:25 AM CST
I personally don't see why Cabals would have to be something that 90% of all WMs got involved with anyway. DR as a whole needs more options, not just for each guild, but for every individual. Aside from the choice of enhancing a non-standard skill that doesn't make much of an impact to the character, everyone's current paths are pretty linear. Moon mages have taken a reasonable step away from that dullness, but for the most part, everyone is still boxed in.
I'd like to see clans, political parties, countless creation skills, academic conclaves, religious sects, you name it. Cabals could be just one choice out of many, and an option that Warrior Mages can take - or leave.
What I am hearing is that some people don't want these things, because they don't apply to everyone across the board. Of course they don't. By their very nature, their very value, they apply only to people who find them interesting and suitable to their character's path. If everyone did them, they would lose their function.
Does that mean we should never apply GM time to something that isn't used by the majority of the players? In that case, we should not see the 100th level quest for many years yet. Togball was created, and I think it's a wonderful thing for the gameworld - even though the number of people playing Togs, and playing Togs that want to play ball, is pretty limited compared to the rest of the population. Was it a waste to devote GM time to it?
I don't think we can make that sort of blanket judgement about the worth of a project based solely on the number of people it will involve. There are other issues to consider, such as the need for 'sideways' expansion in the game and for more choices in character development.
---Brett
I'd like to see clans, political parties, countless creation skills, academic conclaves, religious sects, you name it. Cabals could be just one choice out of many, and an option that Warrior Mages can take - or leave.
What I am hearing is that some people don't want these things, because they don't apply to everyone across the board. Of course they don't. By their very nature, their very value, they apply only to people who find them interesting and suitable to their character's path. If everyone did them, they would lose their function.
Does that mean we should never apply GM time to something that isn't used by the majority of the players? In that case, we should not see the 100th level quest for many years yet. Togball was created, and I think it's a wonderful thing for the gameworld - even though the number of people playing Togs, and playing Togs that want to play ball, is pretty limited compared to the rest of the population. Was it a waste to devote GM time to it?
I don't think we can make that sort of blanket judgement about the worth of a project based solely on the number of people it will involve. There are other issues to consider, such as the need for 'sideways' expansion in the game and for more choices in character development.
---Brett
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/28/2002 01:27 AM CST
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/28/2002 02:42 AM CST
Well said Brett, some very good points there. It's obvious that not everyone is interested in cabals, but there is a percentage of us that still are. I can completely understand why a person would rather not focus themselves on a certain element, but I beleive when Valdrik spoke of specialization he mentioned that people who opted to remain a general element mage would still have some kind of benefit. But anyway, cabals would at least offer a set of career choices to broaden the guild. I think most people who are opposed to this tend to think that joining a cabal would restrict you to the corresponding element, but I doubt that was ever an intended feature.
Moon mage sects don't really restrict them in any way, they can still cast any spell they like and as far as I know they don't get penalties. It's just a road you can choose to follow if you so desire, much like Brett was saying.
~Sardric~
Moon mage sects don't really restrict them in any way, they can still cast any spell they like and as far as I know they don't get penalties. It's just a road you can choose to follow if you so desire, much like Brett was saying.
~Sardric~
Re: Don't cut the cabal on 12/29/2002 06:49 AM CST
Ok, a few good points raised again, but i think some of the main points are being missed. Valdrik already talked about working on specialization and my argument is that since cabals have been around so long (albeit non-officially) they should be incorporated and developed, rather than binned.
Although possibly true that spells would be trimmed to allow room for cabal bonuses, It's not the only way the road could twist. There may not be spell bonuses, perhaps some other kind of perk to specializing. Or maybe just a reduction in mana cost to your prefered element spells to reflect your greater knowledge.
I do somewhat agree that cabals shouldn't be restricted to just elements because I also like the idea that we could combine them, rather than control one at a time. I'm indecisive, sure would be nice to get some GM thoughts ;D
~Sardric~
Although possibly true that spells would be trimmed to allow room for cabal bonuses, It's not the only way the road could twist. There may not be spell bonuses, perhaps some other kind of perk to specializing. Or maybe just a reduction in mana cost to your prefered element spells to reflect your greater knowledge.
I do somewhat agree that cabals shouldn't be restricted to just elements because I also like the idea that we could combine them, rather than control one at a time. I'm indecisive, sure would be nice to get some GM thoughts ;D
~Sardric~