returning after deleting accounts

[AlexR]

The case currently under discussion in Fontan has mostly caused waves because the character who's returned was swiftly appointed vice-marshal of an army by one of my characters who knew him well. If that sucks for people who've joined the realm in the period since the other player deleted his account then I'm sorry, but OOC grievance has no place IC and IC there is no better candidate for the job as has been made very clear to the critics.

I think you missed the point.  It's not an OOC grievance -- it's you using an unreasonable OOC basis to appoint someone.  Basically "there is no better candidate" because you know the player.  I personally really hate OOC appointments that have no basis in RP at all.  The turn-around in positions is slow enough as it is, without OOC appointments

Now recreating the same family name is fine, but trying to RP the same character with same name but with 17-year old noble is just wrong.  For example, he won't be able to command SF forces at all due to lack of honor/prestige, no matter how experienced you claim him to be.

[Draco Tanos]

And then you have Sanctus Acies:

We believe that part of the soul will never make it to the "Hall of Heroes" but that part will be reborn in a cycle of life being added to your family when a new Noble comes forth to take your place, certain memories and actions will be the same as the family member departed.

I always found it funny that Indirik complained about the CoH when he had his character join SA.

Retaking the family name?  That's fine, though I would personally rather see cadet branches replace the old family line.
Replaying a character?  Well, I suppose it's alright so long as the previous character wasn't executed or otherwise killed.  Though rerolling a character just because they were old seems tasteless.

As to the Fontan situation?  A new character that none of your family has had interaction with?  Poor role-playing.  A character that immigrated and has a history that other characters in your family may have known?  That is far more understandable.  Especially if they have a letter of introduction from your kin.
The Acies "reincarnation" method where dead characters can simply be remade?  Completely tasteless and against good roleplaying sense. Personally, I think if my character ran across this instance, he would likely view it as a grieving family member who lost their mind.  Or a possession, in which case my priests would have to drive the spirits or demons from the body!

[feyeleanor]

I think you missed the point.  It's not an OOC grievance -- it's you using an unreasonable OOC basis to appoint someone.  Basically "there is no better candidate" because you know the player.

Actually I don't know the player, but my character does know the family of his character and in a medieval world where pedigree was everything it would be quite natural to expect even a young knight of impeccable lineage to demonstrate known virtues, even if our cynical modern minds see the flaws in that argument. Were she to appoint a 17 year old of his lineage as vice-marshal that would be entirely consistent so long as the virtues she seeks are the virtues that lineage possesses.

However in this case she has met him in the field and believes that he is the very same knight who until recently served as a vice-marshal and a member of her military council when she was minister of defence. The fact he is now in somewhat more robust health than before is certainly an intriguing puzzle, but it is far from unprecedented.

[Indirik]

@dracotanos: I didn't care for Sanctus Acies either. Balkeese joined it as an "FU" to CoH. But I think that was long before you joined BattleMaster, even.

As to the original topic, I don't care if you remake a family. Go for it. I dislike it when people recreate a character. I don't care what your RP about it is. Just make a new character.

[Indirik]

Also, about the Sanctus Acies "reincarnation", I don't read it the same way as DracoTanos does. I don't think it is intended to allow you to just restart the character all over. And I don't think anyone has ever done that. Ever. Slamming them based on your interpretation of what their theology allows, when that hasn't ever actually been done IG, is pretty unfair, and far off the mark.

[Draco Tanos]

Explain the now paused Eagles Reach Rebirth, whose previous character died as a Hero in battle and then used that clause to remake Eagles Reach and have him go the path of SA priest?

He was also the head priest for along time, wasn't he?

As per the interpretation, I actually showed it to several people, RP buddies who have yet to join BM, and they all immediately picked up on it as an excuse for metagaming at best.

[Chenier]

I always found that pretty lame, saw some influential fifty/sixty year old characters deleted and recreated later on, with the same name and body of 17 year old. I was new to the game then, and it pissed me off immensely that that character basically just rebooted and was treated the same way, given back all his titles, etc... So much for turnover in realms.

It used to be that you couldn't have so many paused characters at the same time. Unless the beer is altering my memory that is.

Not to mention that the game doesn't give the option to start at 50 years old. Imo, you should be able to create a character as old as the oldest chracter you've ever had...

[Indirik]

So far as I know, Eagles Reach Rebirth was not RPd as a reincarnation of the original character. Maybe it was in Caligus, but not in the religion. Nor do I think anyone else ever RPd a reincarnation as the exact same character. But maybe they did, who knows? There are all kinds of people that RPd all kinds of ridiculous things. Look at the "shadow of" and "lillith/lilllith/lillith's ghost/etc." characters we've seen around the game.

For all the things you /could/ castigate Sanctus Acies for, and there are many, some vague reference to reincarnation that, so far as I know, was never used seems pretty lame.