So here’s the situation. Our current GM just unsubbed. He became our gm from using the in game function. He told one of his friends who told us that he set things up so that he could never be dethroned.
We checked armory and found out that recently he changed guild names around and we thought nothing of it, but in reality he set everyone but himself to guild rank 4 and below. If you check the rules, it says the replacement GM would have to be rank 2 or 3. Also he apparently sent in a ticket for clarification and a support gm told him he was correct that the current setup would allow him to never be replaced.
My question is this: Since the function was put in to allows guilds to carry on, or re-vitalize, are the rules that strict that he found this loophole that will in time screw us? I mean, sure maybe he’ll change his mind, but if he doesn’t, is our guild in the end condemned by a technicality?
I have not heard of Game Masters making any exceptions in regards to the dethrone feature. GMs are pretty hands off when it comes to Guilds, and the Guild Master can set things up however they wish. Unfortunately, this also means they can set it up so that they can never be dethroned, and the Game Masters won’t intervene in this instance.
The best thing to do would be to create a new guild and get some of the existing members to join.
Best of luck!
I vaguely remember one case where Blizzard did intervene, and it seemed to have something to do with how recently the GM had dethroned the previous one or how little they had done other than take over and change ranks around. That said, the particular combination of circumstances are not clear and while you (or actually whomever would have previously been GM or of a rank to dethrone equal to this one) conceivably could try a ticket - the chances are incredibly slight and it might just be worth it to all uproot and make a new guild, taking care with the ranks to put only those who are trusted to value the guild and its members rather than the power in Rank 2 and Rank 3.
To be clear, it’s not a ‘loophole’, it’s a policy.
Just as there’s a policy in place to allow for dethroning an absentee guild leader, there is also a policy in place that allows for a guild leader to avoid being dethroned.
Blizzard is extremely unlikely to intervene on your behalf. If you believe it’s going to become an issue, you are free to leave the guild and start your own.
Edit - for spelling and punctuation (originally posted from my phone)
Form a new guild and leave this fellow to their solitude. Can even have the name of the new guild reflect the way things went down, call yourselves True Midnight Knights or something.
The Dethrone ability, like the policy before it, is intended to allow guilds to carry on in the event of a Guild Leader abandoning the guild, that is true. However, it is also true that specific controls were put in place that allow the Guild Leader to prevent the ability to dethrone if that is what they want to do. So in this case, it is not one where we would intervene.
The situation is one in which the guild leader was dethroned and the new guild leader then stopped playing themselves making no real change to the guild other than taking over. This does not appear to be the same situation.
Well unfortunately we may as well give up now if that’s the case. Why implement a feature to keep guilds going, if you allow someone to be able to totally circumvent that feature. Be like the old days of setting master loot, but some rando chooses ninja loot and he gets to override. I would argue, if any GM doesn’t want to be dethroned, then he can just kick everyone and have his own guild.
Well either way, guess my question is answered. Taking one of wow’s oldest guilds, and the oldest on server still active, and just abandoning it will be sad. I’m very disappointed with the lack of grey area allowed in this rule, really am.
Because when they first set it up, a GM could be dethroned within just 30 days and there was a huge public outcry that it be changed. The current system works basically the exact same as it did when you’d petition a GM to try and take over a guild.
And you’re right. The Guild Leader is welcome to add game time tonight and kick everyone out without saying a word. So where would that leave you compared to right now?
It’s just a guild. There are no bonus points for how old or new it is 
Actually, you’re mad that there’s really very little grey area in this rule.
So, you can feel how you feel, and I can feel how I do.
- If the system didn’t allow a workaround, we’d be with our guild we’ve had forever.
- you can take the nonchalant attitude that its just a guild but that’s not how most of us take it. We are a large group of old-schoolers and have shared a lot. Also in the guild are people that have left and not come back, people who had passed on. Your attitude tbh is kinda insulting.
- Disappointed with the lack of grey area aka less grey area
you’re mad that there’s really very little grey area in this rule aka less grey area
Are you trying to troll so much that you can’t see those 2 are the same?
At first there was no way to keep a guild. After enough time every rank could take it over. But what really ended up happening is inactive guilds that were primarily used as banks by the leader were getting taken over, everything swiped from them. It was very casual unfriendly. This way guilds can be used as the leader wants - large and active guilds can have people in the high ranks, and other people can have members without worrying about losing their investment if they unsubscribe for a while.
The person to blame for this happening is the previous guild leader. He gave up the guild to someone with different interests from the previous leader and the rest of the remaining guild. Unfortunately there is no recourse for that.
And you can still stick with the guild if the name of the guild or those who are in it are still the most important aspect to you.
But Blizz gives the Guild Leader the option to be able to safe-guard their guild from being dethroned in their absence. If the guild is that old and that close, then speak with the guild leader. They can open a ticket and have their position passed on to another player of their choosing.
But it was the community that insisted that a safe-guard be put in place (not a work around, a safe guard) so that the person who put in the most effort, the one who made the guild, got the signatures, set everything up, etc. be able to come back even after an absence to the guild they worked so hard on. And that includes the person that’s been in charge since. If they were in a position to take over, then the original GL felt they were capable of leading. That seems pretty applicable in this situation tbh.
If you’re not happy, contact the guild leader. If they don’t want to give up their guild, then make a new one that all those loyal member can follow along to.
You can just make a continuation of it.
It is there as a compromise, primarily based on tons of feedback from the playerbase, in order to be as fair as we can be.
Technically speaking a guild has almost always been considered to belong to the guild leader. When guild functionality was expanded to include guild banks, the ownership of the guild was even more solidified to belong solely to the guild leader. That was simply how the guild structure worked.
Guilds were created to be a social hub for folks of like mind to join together, to help one another, to face challenges together. For that reason we were sometimes able, under specific conditions, to transfer leadership if the guild appeared to be abandoned by the guild leader.
The Dethrone system is simply an extension of that, but instead of a request that had to be reviewed and considered at the time it was made, all guilds that met specific conditions are automatically given the option to dethrone. Allowing players who may not have ever been aware that it was an option, the ability to take over a guild if the conditions were met.
The Dethrone option continues to allow qualifying members of a guild to replace the guild leader but the guild technically still belongs to the guild leader and therefore they have the right to nullify the dethrone option if they wish by taking the appropriate steps to prevent it.
That used to happen, a lot. It was extremely disruptive to those who were part of the guild and hindered any real option for those who may have been part of a leaderless guild to stay together.
Here is the common scenario… the Guild Leader is leaving for a few months and doesn’t want their guild taken over so they decide to kick everyone out one morning at 3 am when no one else is online. When you log in you have no idea what happened except you are now guildless. In the event that you might want to reform, do you recall everyone who was in the guild previously? All the correct spelling of everyone’s names? Imagine how difficult it might be to get everyone back together.
Now, let’s go with the current alternative… say you are part of a guild where, outside of the guild leader being absent, you otherwise enjoy being part of it and being around the people who are members. If Dethroning wasn’t an option you could still continue on by reforming with those members. You could discuss your options with the rest of the guild in the guild channel. Assuming you decide you want to lead it, you’d let folks know that you were creating a new guild and anyone who wishes to join should contact you, etc.
A good deal easier, right?
There isn’t an option that makes everyone happy, but the current system works to do as well as it can without creating additional problems.
And I guess that’s where our opinions differ. The guild to me belongs to the people in it and to the people who came before that helped make it was it is. Guilds lasting for the same length as the game (minus those first couple days for gold collection) are done so based on everyone’s contribution. Saying that the GM owns the guild is like saying Trump/Obama/Bush etc owns America and I think fundamentally I can’t agree with that thought. In our case, we had an absent GM and our current one used the in game function to assume power without any consensus of the guild populace. Now it wasn’t bad at first but it steadily got that way. Now when the members actually want a say, you’re telling us that this gentlemen, who took that option away from us once, can do it again through the loophole you set up.
“Guilds were created to be a social hub for folks of like mind to join together, to help one another, to face challenges together.” That sentiment I totally agree with. How can this be true if the GM owns the guild and not all of the people in it.
Either way because of what was said here we are going to abandon the guild and make a new one unfortunately. It is not something we are fond of at all but we have no alternative. My feedback is simple, institute the dethroning process in game but make it a vote among the members and take out any loophole that honestly subverts the whole system you put in.
Doesn’t really matter in this case. You may believe the guild to belong to the people in it, but that is incorrect based on the structure of the system and how it’s laid out in the game. Blizzard defines a guild as belonging to the leader. Solely.
Not at all. A country =/= and organization, and there are a vast number of differences between those things.
Gonna have to post this elsewhere then. Customer Support doesn’t take feedback. Incidentally, the reason the “loop hole” exists (it’s not a loop-hole, it’s an intended function) is because of player feedback, as this control was not present when the Dethrone feature was launched.
It isn’t a matter of opinion, Layonhooves, it is of functionality. The guild can’t belong to multiple people from a technical standpoint, it must belong to someone.
While I can appreciate your feedback, Layonhooves, this isn’t the appropriate place for it. We aren’t developers nor are we liaisons with them. If you wish to convey your feedback you’ll want to post in the General discussion forum where it can be seen by them.
With that said, the current iteration of the Dethrone system is the result of a massive amount of feedback discussion that took place when it was originally implemented. I don’t see that level of discussion happening with the current iteration, but who knows.
So we were able to get the guild gm back and thought things were decently cool until last night on a drunken rage the old guy went nuts and kicked all but like 7 toons from 100’s outta the guild. Um, can guilds be restored that way?
If you are asking if we are going to circumvent what a current Guild Master decides to do, no - no we won’t.
Again, Guild Masters are allowed to do whatever they want.
What happened to starting a new guild? The GM has the right to kick whomever they want out of the guild. Form your own guild and become the GM and you can run it however you want.
Nothing is going to happen to “the old guy” who kicked people out of the guild.