Titles: just who do you think you are?

I like the idea of there being celebrities in the game because it makes the game more interesting and lifelike to me. In my mind, celebrities can be of many different kinds, e.g. community leaders (like those who host a lot of community events, run Avatar's Radio, run POTs and/or Guilds, etc.), outlaws (notorious bad guys), heroes (well-known champions of good) or "real" nobility (e.g. high level pledgers who display their titles). Just like in real life, the title of Duke or Baron alone doesn't mean that that person would automatically command my respect. But if I lived in a POT run by a Duke or Baron it would be fun to role play being a loyal subject.

 

As a Duke, i would never want people to address me like this. It is not my style to put on airs. I believe in the era of the game, there were dukes like this; although, they might be looked down on by other nobility.

 

Sorry Themo Lock, I see you have passion in the subject of being able to role play a duke, a knight, or whatever. It's all going to boil down to personal opinion. When the game does come out who's gonna know who we are that contributed to the game and at what level
we contributed to the game, and that the game was made and perhaps made better because we were here giving our sometimes very passionate feedback to it? The point I make when this game is released to the public, these forums will perhaps be our memories and not
ncecessarily the vision anyone just buying the game will know about or even care about. It will be up to us to play our own game the way we want, which will be different for each person in some ways, and also for some parts of game play for those following the content and story line
may be similar in some ways. It is fine to role play the way you or anyone likes. Perhaps it will look a bit different once we are in game playing the game and perhaps not.

I remember coming into a new game, well new for me, well just as a bad example and not necessarily the one, but I'll use "Runes of Magic" . So I remember seeing people with unusual mounts, woman in sparkly and cool clothing I wish I could find, etc and thinking wow they must have spent a lot on those items or maybe I would briefly think where did they get those items? We may see some of that, but unless we tell the world they will not know and maybe not even care that these are our pledge items because they too will be on their new gaming adventure. I won't really know the exact role play I will play until I am there in the moment. I can think about it and perhaps remember fun memories from Ultima. In the long run I just planned to have fun and also not segregate myself
from others by titles, status, or anything else. I will bow to you and other Dukes because I will know you from my time here, and because I care about you and everyones elses game experience being wonderful, and I will not display a title if I can help it.

edited to correct op name.........sorry I think Thermo Lock sounds like a space name wrong genre

 

No need to apologise,i am actually not all that passionate about it at all (though i do find it fun to participate).

 

You're terrific Themo Lock. I do carry on lol Hope you are still awake

 

Huge amounts of respect for you Lady Majoria. At this rate, everyone will have to care for you too. Who wouldn't?

 

I think there should be 2 ways to get a title: 1. By buying it early like we did and 2. By earning the title in-game just like we had on Earth in the old days. Here are my reasons why:

1. There are people who used to be avid UO gamers because they had a lot of time on their hands. Now they don't have that time but still want to play on a more casual basis. They wish they could become an expert player but they never will because they don't have the time. However, they have the money, so they invested in the game and bought the title, etc. Why not? It is bad enough that they will never have the time now like they used to.

2. There are young people who have never played a game like this and are studying hard at school but they have money so they buy the title and fund the game. It is not that they would not like to earn it in-game. They never will be able to.

3. There are expert UO players who have the time and the money but do not want to buy the title. They would rather earn it because they have the time to learn to become an expert and would love to experience it. They are very lucky to have the time to earn something in the best way possible. We just have not given them the opportunity yet. Perhaps after the game is finished, we could have a system in place that allows them to earn the title of knight, etc., by Lord British or someone in the game who is higher up.

I may never have the time to earn a title higher than Lady Marshall, but I wouldn't mind trying. But I think it should be a real challenge to earn because I believe that people in Guilds who are really into the game are not in a hurry for the game to end. They don't mind waiting and really earning the title so that people say, "Awesome, you really earned the title of Knight!"

 

I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your post. I am going to vehemently disagree. I fall squarely into the first category you described of UO players who have grown older, will play SotA on a more casual basis than we played UO, and invested in SotA. Your post suggests that you would like to see two manners to earn the titles that Backers have earned; however, you appear to recognize that it will not be the case. I don't think this is a case that should be sugar coated. Life is not fair. A young person is not likely to have the financial resources that I have. That young person is likely to have the ability to play some good games (or whatever entertainment exists in the future) that I will likely not survive to experience. That is how the proverbial cookie crumbles...

Aside from the promised exclusivity of the Backer titles, playing SotA with great skill does not fund SotA development. The Backer titles acknowledge a contribution that make it possible for the skilled SotA player to even have a game to play. You can take away the skilled players and SotA still exists. Take away the Backers and SotA might not exist. There can be titles earned ingame that can be displayed by all three of the categories you described but only Backers should merit Backer titles in my opinion.

 

I think this a great idea. Whimsical titles would be great. I would also be happy to see some form of self created titles as well, so long one way or another they don't conflict with existing special / achievement / backer titles.

 

In watched this thread with interest. This account has a nobility title. This account owns a Player Owned Town (POT) that will be a role-play town. I fully intend to role-play this account as a noble – whatever that means in the role-play community. It may mean that the nobility role-play does not extend beyond the limits of the POT and the main character on the account is just a POT owner by another name as far as everyone else is concerned.

I am not entirely sure I understand exactly what is being asked. I think it is reasonable to use other nobility titles that are not otherwise being used as Backer titles. I can think of one role-play community that plans to be led by a “Jarl”. A sticky point that has been raised in at least one other thread is familial relations to accounts that have a title. As an example, a character that has an Earl title is married ingame to another character so should game mechanics allow the “spouse” character to have a “Countess” title? Should the role-play community recognize the spouse as a Countess if the ingame spouse’s account is not pledged appropriately? To further that discussion, should the role-play community acknowledge a courtesy title for a character who is the son of my character? I think the role-play community will adopt a general accepted practice.

If we are talking about in the dedicated role-play community, my answer is “It could actually be useful”. I feel as though it has great potential for role-play. I think it could be interesting if there were a Parliament of sorts with a House of Lords (comprised of titled nobles) and a House of Commons (comprised of community and guild leaders). The House of Lords could be ceremonial or limited in power by design or as a result of role-play. Maybe there is a war(s) where noble army fights the people’s army and the House of Lords loses its influence if the people’s army wins.
To be understood, there is a difference between class division of avatars and how we treat each other as players. The question that comes into play for me is how do you sustain a healthy role-play community if there is not a direct correlation between an avatar title and a player’s capacity to lead? I would suggest that the role-play community should NOT limit itself to avatar titles while continuing to recognize avatar titles. I would suggest that leaders in the role-play community could utilize “political” titles to augment the “social” titles borne by backer avatars.

They are likely fair and deserved if you believe in equality of opportunity. They are likely unfair and undeserved if you prioritize equality of outcome. Interestingly enough, nobility on Earth certainly does not prioritize equality of outcome insofar as nobility is concerned and doesn’t hold equality of opportunity in high regard either. I would argue that the titles are fairer than noble titles on Earth though I would qualify that with a statement that it depends upon Portalarium’s lore, if any, for the titles.

I personally feel as though “political” titles are better than nobility titles for owners of player owned towns. I see no reason why characters who own player owned towns should not have as much influence and political power as nobility depending upon Portalarium’s lore for both town owners and nobility.

It remains whether or not the role-play community will find this behavior acceptable. If not, a character is claiming a title of nobility when a character does not merit the title. In UO, I remember a character who was adamant that he was a dragon and expected us to suffer as though we were burned by his role-played dragon breath. Being a dragon and all (within the Trammel rule set mind you), it was impossible to harm the “dragon”. It was classic godmoding. The general rule of thumb that I am familiar with is that those type of characters generally get treated as though they are lying, fraudulent, mentally disturbed, or some similar fashion. I suppose you can be the judge of whether it breaks immersion but I think most experienced role-players have experienced this type of behavior and can assist others who are not.

I don’t know if it is counter productive. We are coming from modern day Earth and find ourselves thrust into a medieval steampunk world so it seems to me that a “campaign for equality” is not outside the realm of possibility. I would also note that there are very little mechanics of feudalism as we know it on Earth in New Britannia. It is unlikely that players will be willing to play the role of serf nor is there an actual need for serfs. Since we are talking role-play here, I think it could be a source of role-play that could span more than one Episode.

On Earth, there are plenty of historical examples of nobility that were not up to the noble standards. In my view, nobles who don’t comport to the standards of nobility should be treated as ignoble. Frankly, I have no doubt many of the high end backers will not have a concern at all about whether or not the RP community acknowledges them. Insofar as the griefer is concerned, I doubt they will find quarter in the role-play community.

 

Yeah none of those were things i personally wanted answers too, at the time of the post these topics were derailing other threads so i tried to consolidate them into this thread . I like your response though.