Freehold Hollow Stats

If the Redoubt is stifling RP, I'm cool with killing it. Especially if there are other locations fulfilling the need. As for having a Freehold-only space vs. pressuring people to join: let's fix the Freehold first. Let's make it something people want to join and to promote. It's well and good to say 'players should promote the Freehold' but the fact is the Freehold is a joke, and my PC cannot say with a straight face that it's a good idea to join. THAT is why he stopped promoting it. Fix the Freehold so that it sells itself. Then you won't have to worry about people not promoting it. Promoting it will be the logical IC course of action.

Truth and Lies wrote:

I don't see why people should complain about Gentry attacks and ect. Those are the sort of things that generate RP and interest.

I agree. People may have complained, but not to me (admittedly, people may have complained before I was around, etc).

I would like _a_ space that was Freehold only for certain things that Courts run on - Freehold-only decisions, places for the 'messageboard' to exist ICly etc. It certainly doesn't have to be a massive multi-room space, IMO, though. It could be one or two rooms, with no dwellings connected because it's simply for business. And the last lockdown point if things go to all hell. Maybe it's even a neutral space where the courts can meet up, where stern decisions can be made. But it doesn't have to be very big at all.

Alexander wrote:

Yes, it is. The thing, though, is that /all/ Changelings should /want/ to be a member of the Freehold, for their security. If someone isn't a member of the Freehold, the question comes back to why?

In terms of Lawless, I can answer this easily. He's just come from his Keeper, where he was bound. A virtual slave and now he is utterly without limit and fetter. The thought of binding himself to someone else strongly is a mild anathema to him. And as far as he has seen so far, there is no deep, compelling reason to join the Freehold. Protection, sure. But he can be as protected by skulking the edges silently. Or so he thinks.

Lost are careful and cautious. A big pledge like joining a Freehold shouldn't be simple for them because it is a bit of trust to put oneself under the leadership of a monarch when it could have parallels to binding oneself to a keeper-like central focus of power again.

I rarely see anyone RPing in the Redoubt. I'd definitely disagree that it stifles RP. It may have in the past with certain players but since I've been on, the problem I'd have suggested was that it wasn't utilized nearly as much as it could be. Just my experience from the last couple of months.

So at this point, I have a question for staff: is any of what's been brought up viable to be used? Either the system proposed for its upkeep, or getting rid of it, or...?

Lawless wrote:

Alexander wrote:

Yes, it is. The thing, though, is that /all/ Changelings should /want/ to be a member of the Freehold, for their security. If someone isn't a member of the Freehold, the question comes back to why?

In terms of Lawless, I can answer this easily. He's just come from his Keeper, where he was bound. A virtual slave and now he is utterly without limit and fetter. The thought of binding himself to someone else strongly is a mild anathema to him. And as far as he has seen so far, there is no deep, compelling reason to join the Freehold. Protection, sure. But he can be as protected by skulking the edges silently. Or so he thinks.

Lost are careful and cautious. A big pledge like joining a Freehold shouldn't be simple for them because it is a bit of trust to put oneself under the leadership of a monarch when it could have parallels to binding oneself to a keeper-like central focus of power again.

One thing you are missing lawless is that every changeling went through the same as you. Thats the theme were all captured were all escaped for some reason. We wouldn't have tried to escape if we did not like where we were in Fae. There is saftey in numbers and an Oath guarantees loyalty. Thats its point. usualy you wouldnt work with another changeling or do a task for them without making an oath til the task is done then you get your rewards. Thats the point of a Freeholds pledge. Its your protection. Most changelings who stay it alone get caught again.

Alister wrote:

Lawless wrote:

Alexander wrote:

Yes, it is. The thing, though, is that /all/ Changelings should /want/ to be a member of the Freehold, for their security. If someone isn't a member of the Freehold, the question comes back to why?

In terms of Lawless, I can answer this easily. He's just come from his Keeper, where he was bound. A virtual slave and now he is utterly without limit and fetter. The thought of binding himself to someone else strongly is a mild anathema to him. And as far as he has seen so far, there is no deep, compelling reason to join the Freehold. Protection, sure. But he can be as protected by skulking the edges silently. Or so he thinks.

Lost are careful and cautious. A big pledge like joining a Freehold shouldn't be simple for them because it is a bit of trust to put oneself under the leadership of a monarch when it could have parallels to binding oneself to a keeper-like central focus of power again.

One thing you are missing lawless is that every changeling went through the same as you. Thats the theme were all captured were all escaped for some reason. We wouldn't have tried to escape if we did not like where we were in Fae. There is saftey in numbers and an Oath guarantees loyalty. Thats its point. usualy you wouldnt work with another changeling or do a task for them without making an oath til the task is done then you get your rewards. Thats the point of a Freeholds pledge. Its your protection. Most changelings who stay it alone get caught again.

It's not protection if the oath is arbitrary and can be abused. Or, as was shown - you can shoot someone in the Freehold in the face and that doesn't actually mean you broke an oath. And that this was fixed afterwards was probably a relief to many of us, so kudos for having the guts to change this, staff.

Mind, I am of the firm belief that the oath and the laws should micromanage as little as possible, and the organisation of the Freehold will keep things in check.

[quote="Brand"
It's not protection if the oath is arbitrary and can be abused. Or, as was shown - you can shoot someone in the Freehold in the face and that doesn't actually mean you broke an oath. And that this was fixed afterwards was probably a relief to many of us, so kudos for having the guts to change this, staff.

Mind, I am of the firm belief that the oath and the laws should micromanage as little as possible, and the organisation of the Freehold will keep things in check. [/quote]

What was fixed or changed?

Alister, I'm quite aware of those things. But I'm looking at things from Lawless' mind. He will eventually pledge, though for reasons other than simply joining the group, but taking what he has heard IC, he has reason to wonder if the Freehold would really offer any more protection than being alone. Though hopefully those matters will be solved in the future. If not by others, he will certainly be pushing to tighten up the homefront considerably.

Lawless wrote:

Alister, I'm quite aware of those things. But I'm looking at things from Lawless' mind. He will eventually pledge, though for reasons other than simply joining the group, but taking what he has heard IC, he has reason to wonder if the Freehold would really offer any more protection than being alone. Though hopefully those matters will be solved in the future. If not by others, he will certainly be pushing to tighten up the homefront considerably.

Thats fine, i was speaking from an OOC perspective not an Ic perspective.