[OOC] Fire Emblem - The Reclaimers of Peace

[Juka Gearsworth]

Just wondering, I'm accepted?

[TentacleLord]

Is it too late to voice interest?

[Lugubrious]

How many characters can we have?

@ToadRopes

Two characters.

@Juka Gearsworth
Yes, but I hope you'll revisit and add to the History as I post information about the nations

@Prince Of Seraphs
I was actually planning to do some parts of this. In the weapons section, I was going to detail all the different sorts of weapons that fit into the different categories. I was also going to make it so that those who exclusively wield staves can still hit with them, but just aren't very proficient at doing so and therefore rely more on fighter classes to protect them.

The classes have certain rules to them, but they're more guidelines than restrictions.

@TentacleLord
It is not too late, but if you do, I certainly hope you'll pay this RP closer attention than you did the last one we shared. Vanishing without saying anything leaves a particularly sour taste in my mouth.

[Juka Gearsworth]

All right, I'll add it as you write =) Also can I post my character in the Char section?

[Lugubrious]

All right, I'll add it as you write =) Also can I post my character in the Char section?

@Juka Gearsworth

Yep.

[Lady Seraphina]

In my opinion though, removing the the class restrictions, removes part of the Fire Emblem from this Fire Emblem role play.

Doing that would take a significant step to being your run of the mill, medieval fantasy role play. Something that is a dime a dozen on this website to begin with.

@Gareth

I wasn't thinking remove them completely but alter then within a logical progression to allow for more realistic scenarios and development. While we're on the subject of how Fire Emblem differs from run of the mill, medieval fantasy games most of that has to do with the game play command style as a pieces on a chess board sort of design which is essentially lost when transitioning it to a roleplay. It's already very close to being a run of the mill, medieval fantasy roleplay simply by the necessity of how Fire Emblem games are written and designed so throwing out the class system wouldn't exactly do that much more than making Fire Emblem into a roleplay hasn't already done, that said I wasn't suggesting we throw out the class system.

@Prince Of Seraphs
I was actually planning to do some parts of this. In the weapons section, I was going to detail all the different sorts of weapons that fit into the different categories. I was also going to make it so that those who exclusively wield staves can still hit with them, but just aren't very proficient at doing so and therefore rely more on fighter classes to protect them.

The classes have certain rules to them, but they're more guidelines than restrictions.

@Lugubrious

The problems I'm having is that the class system as it is currently set up extreme limits on what I can do with a character. I can't create a thief that plays a musical instrument because that falls into the Bard's class. I can't have a knight who knows lances and swords or a Mage that fell on hard times and resorted to stealing learning the tricks of a thief in the process. I can't have a Fighter whose familiar with tactical analysis because that falls under the domain of the Tacticians. I can't create a Kindred whose ashamed of there ancestor and so prefers using conventional weapons and only uses the transformation stones in extremely dire circumstances. I've got a hundred different ideas for characters spinning round my head and each time I think I've landed on one that works well I cross reverence it with the class guide and realize that it crosses the boundaries too far.

On a completely unrelated note is the Falchion going to be making an appearance?

[TentacleLord]

@Lugubrious Right, I will. I won't make excuses for leaving, but will offer my sincerest apologies toward the matter.

[Lugubrious]

<Snipped quote by Lugubrious>

The problems I'm having is that the class system as it is currently set up extreme limits on what I can do with a character. I can't create a thief that plays a musical instrument because that falls into the Bard's class. I can't have a knight who knows lances and swords or a Mage that fell on hard times and resorted to stealing learning the tricks of a thief in the process. I can't have a Fighter whose familiar with tactical analysis because that falls under the domain of the Tacticians. I can't create a Kindred whose ashamed of there ancestor and so prefers using conventional weapons and only uses the transformation stones in extremely dire circumstances. I've got a hundred different ideas for characters spinning round my head and each time I think I've landed on one that works well I cross reverence it with the class guide and realize that it crosses the boundaries too far.

On a completely unrelated note is the Falchion going to be making an appearance?

@Prince of Seraphs

Except you can. There is no bard class, 'Troubadour' is just the name of the mounted healers, and instruments have no inherent magical properties, so any class can have musical instruments. You can have your knight do that after he promotes. You can have a Mage with thieving skill but who doesn't use swords (the useful skills I mentioned in the thieves entry are ones that are essential to, but not exclusive to, thieves). Same goes for Tacticians--while tactical knowledge is required if you're a tactician, it is not exclusive to the tactician class. A Kindred can reclass into a different fighting style, thereby losing the ability to transform.

And maybe.

I'll put up the bits about reclassing and essential but nonexclusive skills to the OP.

[Gareth]

<Snipped quote by Gareth>

I wasn't thinking remove them completely but alter then within a logical progression to allow for more realistic scenarios and development. While we're on the subject of how Fire Emblem differs from run of the mill, medieval fantasy games most of that has to do with the game play command style as a pieces on a chess board sort of design which is essentially lost when transitioning it to a roleplay. It's already very close to being a run of the mill, medieval fantasy roleplay simply by the necessity of how Fire Emblem games are written and designed so throwing out the class system wouldn't exactly do that much more than making Fire Emblem into a roleplay hasn't already done, that said I wasn't suggesting we throw out the class system.

@Prince of Seraphs

I think I was trying to make this roleplay = fire emblem totally. xD It's not my roleplay lol. And so when I read that you wanted the weapons for certain people to be more realistic, like a archer able to use something to be to defend themselves from close range, I ended up posting back no, in more words.

From:The Prince of Seraphs:
The problems I'm having is that the class system as it is currently set up extreme limits on what I can do with a character. I can't create a thief that plays a musical instrument because that falls into the Bard's class. I can't have a knight who knows lances and swords or a Mage that fell on hard times and resorted to stealing learning the tricks of a thief in the process. I can't have a Fighter whose familiar with tactical analysis because that falls under the domain of the Tacticians. I can't create a Kindred whose ashamed of there ancestor and so prefers using conventional weapons and only uses the transformation stones in extremely dire circumstances. I've got a hundred different ideas for characters spinning round my head and each time I think I've landed on one that works well I cross reverence it with the class guide and realize that it crosses the boundaries too far.

From Lugubrious

Except you can. There is no bard class, 'Troubadour' is just the name of the mounted healers, and instruments have no inherent magical properties, so any class can have musical instruments. You can have your knight do that after he promotes. You can have a Mage with thieving skill but who doesn't use swords (the useful skills I mentioned in the thieves entry are ones that are essential to, but not exclusive to, thieves). Same goes for Tacticians--while tactical knowledge is required if you're a tactician, it is not exclusive to the tactician class. A Kindred can reclass into a different fighting style, thereby losing the ability to transform.

I'll put up the bits about reclassing and essential but nonexclusive skills to the OP.

From Me: Yeah I think I was just trying to be super loyal to the games. Having a realistic roleplay can't be like the games, because as Seraph says there is no chessboard in roleplays. I agree that, the chessboard is the most fire emblemish separator from run of the mill midieval fantasy roleplays.

Anyway having more freedom of character creation like having a wyvern rider learn to be a street performer or whatever the case may be, would be awesome, (my opinion.)

I hope I haven't stepped on anybody's toes.

[Lugubrious]

<Snipped quote by Prince of Seraphs>

I think I was trying to make this roleplay = fire emblem totally. xD It's not my roleplay lol. And so when I read that you wanted the weapons for certain people to be more realistic, like a archer able to use something to be to defend themselves from close range, I ended up posting back no, in more words.

Anyway having more freedom of character creation like having a wyvern rider learn to be a street performer or whatever the case may be, would be awesome, (my opinion.)

I hope I haven't stepped on anybody's toes.

@Gareth

Not at all! I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with.

In other news, weapons and magic sections completed. Now working on history.

[Lady Seraphina]

A Kindred can reclass into a different fighting style, thereby losing the ability to transform.

@Lugubrious

That essentially defeats any reason I could possibly have for making him a Kindred in the first place. The idea was that he has an extreme internal crisis about his roots, where he comes from, the origin of his powers and his ability to control them. If he can just swap classes and is no longer able to transform that entire piece of character development and conflict just vanishes. Besides what possible reason could there be that a Kindred would be unable to pick up a sword or a bow?

[Lady Seraphina]

<Snipped quote by Prince of Seraphs>

I think I was trying to make this roleplay = fire emblem totally. xD It's not my roleplay lol. And so when I read that you wanted the weapons for certain people to be more realistic, like a archer able to use something to be to defend themselves from close range, I ended up posting back no, in more words.

<Snipped quote by Prince of Seraphs>

<Snipped quote by Lugubrious>

Yeah I think I was just trying to be super loyal to the games. Having a realistic roleplay can't be like the games, because as Seraphs says there is no chessboard in roleplays. I agree that, the chessboard is the most Fire Emblemish separator from run of the mill medieval fantasy games.

Anyway having more freedom of character creation like having a Wyvern rider learn to be a street performer or whatever the case may be, would be awesome, (my opinion.)

I hope I haven't stepped on anybody's toes.

@Gareth

The only toes stepped on would be mine with that deplorable lack of using real quotes in your post. (If you hadn't noticed I've got a thing about formatting) If you want to quote multiple people you just need to click the quote button on different posts. The site will add the quote to whatever's in the New Reply box rather than replacing it.

Your post would then look like this

<Snipped quote by Gareth>

I wasn't thinking remove them completely but alter then within a logical progression to allow for more realistic scenarios and development. While we're on the subject of how Fire Emblem differs from run of the mill, medieval fantasy games most of that has to do with the game play command style as a pieces on a chess board sort of design which is essentially lost when transitioning it to a roleplay. It's already very close to being a run of the mill, medieval fantasy roleplay simply by the necessity of how Fire Emblem games are written and designed so throwing out the class system wouldn't exactly do that much more than making Fire Emblem into a roleplay hasn't already done, that said I wasn't suggesting we throw out the class system.

@Prince of Seraphs

I think I was trying to make this roleplay = fire emblem totally. xD It's not my roleplay lol. And so when I read that you wanted the weapons for certain people to be more realistic, like a archer able to use something to be to defend themselves from close range, I ended up posting back no, in more words.

<Snipped quote by Lugubrious>

The problems I'm having is that the class system as it is currently set up extreme limits on what I can do with a character. I can't create a thief that plays a musical instrument because that falls into the Bard's class. I can't have a knight who knows lances and swords or a Mage that fell on hard times and resorted to stealing learning the tricks of a thief in the process. I can't have a Fighter whose familiar with tactical analysis because that falls under the domain of the Tacticians. I can't create a Kindred whose ashamed of there ancestor and so prefers using conventional weapons and only uses the transformation stones in extremely dire circumstances. I've got a hundred different ideas for characters spinning round my head and each time I think I've landed on one that works well I cross reverence it with the class guide and realize that it crosses the boundaries too far.

@Prince of Seraphs

<Snipped quote by Prince of Seraphs>

Except you can. There is no bard class, 'Troubadour' is just the name of the mounted healers, and instruments have no inherent magical properties, so any class can have musical instruments. You can have your knight do that after he promotes. You can have a Mage with thieving skill but who doesn't use swords (the useful skills I mentioned in the thieves entry are ones that are essential to, but not exclusive to, thieves). Same goes for Tacticians--while tactical knowledge is required if you're a tactician, it is not exclusive to the tactician class. A Kindred can reclass into a different fighting style, thereby losing the ability to transform.

I'll put up the bits about reclassing and essential but nonexclusive skills to the OP.

@Lugubrious

Yeah I think I was just trying to be super loyal to the games. Having a realistic roleplay can't be like the games, because as Seraphs says there is no chessboard in roleplays. I agree that, the chessboard is the most Fire Emblemish separator from run of the mill medieval fantasy games.

Anyway having more freedom of character creation like having a Wyvern rider learn to be a street performer or whatever the case may be, would be awesome, (my opinion.)

I hope I haven't stepped on anybody's toes.

[Gareth]

@Prince of Seraphs I'll do that in future. Sorry about your toes.

[ToadRopes]

Name:

Jeanne Robina

Age:

23

Class:

Thief

Weapons:

Iron Sword, Killing Edge, Vulnerary

Fighting Style:

The whole stealing-crap mindset doesn't transfer to combat. Jeanne will face her opponent as is, without using nasty underhanded tricks. She is, however, acrobatic in her movement style, and embellishes movements with those acrobatic motions. Everything she does has a purpose (some of which is to look cool). In using her sword, she points it downwards and has a backhanded grip on the hilt.

Personality:

An honor-bound, charismatic thief who will never steal from the poor and downtrodden. Jeanne has a mischievous air and a flamboyant personality, which contrasts her actual mode of going about her business: in the shadows, through the treetops. She likes her line of work, always full of danger. She is well-liked by the less-well-off, and quite disliked by the affluent. She's always miffed that they never get her eyes right when they put a price over her head. "Takes away from the thrill of the chase," she says. She is always cheery and somewhat sharp-tongued, and likes to alliterate. She is the person in the army who reads the most adventure novels.

History:

Jeanne Robina is no mere petty thief. Hailing from a small forest town (the name of which she chooses not to disclose), Jeanne had a romanticized view of the life of high crime and misdemeanor. Nay, she did not dream of mob bosses and supervillains (can't imagine that they had those in the world of Fire Emblem); instead, she dreamed of being an advocate of the downtrodden layman. She herself was quite impoverished, but cheeky enough to swipe a thing or two from the odd rich folk's caravan. Never did she touch the peddling wagons of the poor; she had a good sense on what the poor were like and rarely made mistakes. She grew up in the forest, becoming well-known as champion of the poverty-stricken villages and infamous as one of the most-wanted brigands to the affluent. Not that she minded; she liked the risk, the challenge. She often jokes that the Guillotine and the Gallows are her best friends.

She especially became good at theft, taking the easy pickings from the rich, because she felt that she had to; her family often could not support itself, even as her father and mother and sister all worked. She never joined any bands of thieves, since she held a set of morals that most brigands and pirates did not. She never stole from the poor, only from the greedy; she never stole from the kind, only from the cruel. Those two tenets have guided Jeanne's moral compass. That being said, many believe that the law should be laid harshly upon her, and so Jeanne remains trapped in the shadows. Not that she minds. It's cool in there.

Appearance:

Jeanne has short wavy chestnut hair that reaches the top of her neck, flaring out. Her eyes are narrow and have smile lines framing them from her jolly demeanor. She has thin lips and a chipped tooth. Her nose does not protrude much from her face. When she smiles, she has dimples. She has an olive bandana that she wraps around her head, and does not wear any jewelry since it flashes and gives her away.

Jeanne has a slender, acrobatic body type all over, in her limbs, torso, hips, etc., and is somewhat average sized, at 5'6". Her clothing is primarily green and brown, much like Robin Hood. She wears a simple olive tunic, bound to her waist by two leather belts with simple dull steel buckles, and brown tights with tan shorts. On her shorts, she has several pockets, and she has clipped her sword's scabbard onto another leather belt. She has various dangling cords and ropes hanging from her belts. Over her tunic, she has a brown hooded vest with gold fringe and a wide neck opening. Jeanne has an olive scarf and brown elbow-length gloves with tan cuffs secured with steel links. Her boots are the same color, though she had time to paint green floral designs down the side. They may look nice, but they serve the purpose of blending into the trees.

Reason for being a Reclaimer:

As stated before, Jeanne is a moral thief. She is no barbaric brigand; she prefers nonviolent interaction (she WILL CUT if threatened), and would much prefer an atmosphere of peace. Also, sending an infamous thief on a mission of peace has some great symbolic value of acceptance and reconciliation. Hopefully these folks will know what a literature is.

Here's my first character.

[Lugubrious]

A very nice character, Toads. Go ahead and put her into the appropriate tab.

<Snipped quote by Lugubrious>

That essentially defeats any reason I could possibly have for making him a Kindred in the first place. The idea was that he has an extreme internal crisis about his roots, where he comes from, the origin of his powers and his ability to control them. If he can just swap classes and is no longer able to transform that entire piece of character development and conflict just vanishes. Besides what possible reason could there be that a Kindred would be unable to pick up a sword or a bow?

@Prince of Seraphs

Or you could not reclass him at all. If he's still Kindred class, he can still be conflicted about his ability to transform, because no matter how much he hates his ancestry, the only way he'll be able to be of any use fighting is if he does transform.

The reason that people wouldn't pick up a brand-new weapon and start using it out of the blue is that they're trained with another weapon. Why use an axe when you've got experience fighting with a sword? In the spirit of the classes being guidelines rather than hard rules, I am planning to make it so that any class can use any weapon--but they'd of course be really terrible using any weapons not prescribed to their class. A class isn't just a label; a character has one because they've been trained in that fashion. Being a Myrmidon doesn't mean you're good with a sword; being good with a sword potentially means you're a Myrmidon.

So your Kindred can pick up a bilhook if he feels like it, and thrust to his heart's content, but anyone with any sort of weapon proficiency would be able to beat him.

In other news, I'm done with three of the nations. Just one left that I'll finish in a few minutes.

[Lady Seraphina]

All rise for Rowan Hood has entered the RP.

Just out of curiosity what possible reason would the Kingdom of Bravura want to send an infamous brigand on there mission of peace?

Just a suggestions Lug but it might not be a bad idea to add something along the lines of: "Reason for Being a Reclaimer" to the CS template.

[Lugubrious]

All rise for Rowan Hood has entered the RP.

Just out of curiosity what possible reason would the Kingdom of Bravura want to send an infamous brigand on there mission of peace?

Just a suggestions Lug but it might not be a bad idea to add something along the lines of: "Reason for Being a Reclaimer" to the CS template.

@Prince of Seraphs

That is a wise idea.

@Everyone, take note: new addition to sheet.

No I get that the classes are assigned based on skill not skill assigned based on class but what I want to know is why couldn't a Kindred have been trained in the use of a sword or knife or axe if his backstory justifies it?

A person can't be a Kindred without training in how to fight in an alternate form. That said, I will make a change to the Kindred class to allow them to have some skill in a 'back-up weapon' of the player's choosing.

[Lady Seraphina]

So your Kindred can pick up a bilhook if he feels like it, and thrust to his heart's content, but anyone with any sort of weapon proficiency would be able to beat him.

@Lugubrious

No I get that the classes are assigned based on skill not skill assigned based on class but what I want to know is why couldn't a Kindred have been trained in the use of a sword or knife or axe if his backstory justifies it?

Also would it be possible for someone to have a stave that they use as a weapon even if they have no proficiency in magic with which to use it's healing properties?

[Lugubrious]

No I get that the classes are assigned based on skill not skill assigned based on class but what I want to know is why couldn't a Kindred have been trained in the use of a sword or knife or axe if his backstory justifies it?

A person can't be a Kindred without training in how to fight in an alternate form. That said, I will make a change to the Kindred class to allow them to have some skill in a 'back-up weapon' of the player's choosing.

Also would it be possible for someone to have a stave that they use as a weapon even if they have no proficiency in magic with which to use it's healing properties?

Yeah, staves can be used to smack people, even by people who can't heal with them.

[ToadRopes]

@LugubriousLet me just add the new thing and I'll add Jeanne to the list.