Patch 4.3: Guild masters can now be impeached
by Fox Van Allen 
Sep 27th 2011 at 6:30PM
One of the most interesting new but unannounced changes: Patch 4.3 looks to bring with it a mechanism by which you can impeach an inactive guild master. What criteria are required to set an impeachment aren't known yet, but a quick look at the code suggests that after a certain amount of time, a guild's second-in-command will be able to take control of a guild set adrift by a leadership vacuum at the top:
World of Warcraft is just a game, and real-life issues frequently come up for guild masters that prevent them from doing their job or indeed even logging on. Given how much effort goes into getting a guild to level 25, this change appears to answer an underlying need for leadership succession.GUILD_IMPEACH_POPUP_CONFIRM = "Dethrone";GUILD_IMPEACH_POPUP_TEXT = "Your guild master has been flagged as inactive. You may assume control of the guild. Do you want to remove the guild master?";
Brace yourselves for what could be some of most exciting updates to the game recently with patch 4.3. Look at what's ahead: new item storage options, cross-realm raiding, cosmetic armor skinning and your chance to battle the mighty Deathwing -- from astride his back! Filed under: News items
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Darkfreak Sep 27th 2011 6:33PM
Interesting
Whitecatsjogging Sep 27th 2011 10:04PM
I don't think that is right unless they have been absent for months. The gm is the main one that puts all the hard work into a guild to get it off and running. They spend time, gold, and blood/sweat on these guilds for a long time. Just like any player they could have a run of bad luck irl and need some time to do what they need. That is why they have officers to help keep things flowing in their absence. Idt a gm should be expected to log in and play for hrs everyday or lose what they worked for when there are ppl that are still in guilds that haven't logged in or 6 months. If ppl don't like a absent gm, they leave a guild right? Why can't that continue to be their penalty for not being around?
Calaana Sep 28th 2011 12:17AM
You're acting like this hasn't already been a policy in the game for years. By everything I've seen, they've just made an interface for it. Rather than a gm just waving a wand and "You're the new gm!", the new gm now gets a notice.
And a guild doesn't belong to any one person, but the people who are in it as a whole. Cata made guilds matter even more, and a way of not loosing everything when one person leaves is long over due. The notion of a guild belonging to any one person is ridiculous, with notable exception to bank guilds, and they don't really count.
Camo Sep 28th 2011 8:10AM
"And a guild doesn't belong to any one person, but the people who are in it as a whole. Cata made guilds matter even more, and a way of not loosing everything when one person leaves is long over due. The notion of a guild belonging to any one person is ridiculous, with notable exception to bank guilds, and they don't really count."
No, the guild belongs to the guild master.
Doubt that? Try to enforce your share after you get kicked.
The GM provides the guild perks and you pay with guild experience and/or money generated through cash flow.
I bought a lvl 25 guild and I let people play and use the perks as they like.
We have yet to see what the conditions are, to be dethroned but I assure you that I'll purge the roster if they should pose a threat.
RothKeahi Sep 28th 2011 10:59AM
Wow Camo. You sound like a terrible GM.
Camo Sep 28th 2011 12:08PM
"Wow Camo. You sound like a terrible GM."
I know I am, but not for that fact.
I'm a capitalist and I bought the guild for the perks.
If other people can also profit from the perks, fine, but I refuse give it to someone just because he thinks, he is entitled to be the GM.
If I need to kick everyone to protect my asset, I'll do it. Yes, it isn't nice, I've been there, too.
The reason why I'm a terrible GM is, that I don't use the power of a GM to turn the members into decent players.
Lucidique Sep 28th 2011 8:34PM
Yeah. State all of that when any new members join. I'll bet you 100g people will be turned off by the fact you apply market strategies into a videogame, meant to relax and cool off. Not to mention you seem be fond of the Guildmaster being a King of sorts, and guildmembers are nothing but servants.
That's nothing short of bullshit.
Corvana Sep 28th 2011 10:31PM
Wow, Camo, just....wow. Every time I start to think I've seen the limit of the amount of self-centered douchebaggery that one person is capable of...I see something like this.
Wait....you're not this guy, are you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtvIYRrgZ04
(Note: Link NSFW)
Camo Sep 29th 2011 12:32PM
"Yeah. State all of that when any new members join. I'll bet you 100g people will be turned off by the fact you apply market strategies into a videogame, meant to relax and cool off. Not to mention you seem be fond of the Guildmaster being a King of sorts, and guildmembers are nothing but servants.
That's nothing short of bullshit."
There are no raids, dungeons or BGs and no required attendance, they are free to leave at any time they want.
As it is impossible to exhaust the perks, any member can only profit and since there is no way to serve they can't be servants.
"Every time I start to think I've seen the limit of the amount of self-centered douchebaggery that one person is capable of...I see something like this."
Capitalism implies selfishness. Yes, I keep the gold that is generated through cash flow but don't they profit from the perks while they generate it? In addition there are many activities enhanced by perks that won't generate gold.
As I already said, I don't care if someone else can profit from those perks while they benefit me.
lethian Oct 4th 2011 3:59AM
@ Camo
"The GM provides the guild perks and you pay with guild experience and/or money generated through cash flow."
Now im very good friends with my GM and i am an officer, however you do not BUY the perks, you buy SOME of the perks key word there, the rest are giveing by you GUILD, try lvling a guild to 25 by yourself. The gl and officers are there to watch over and lead it, your no different fromt he other players. ive been a part of my guild 3 years now. and you sir are a terrible GL.
-Try to enforce your share after you get kicked. (word of mouth noone will join or for long)
-I bought a lvl 25 guild and I let people play and use the perks as they like. (you bought it you didnt get it from 1-25)
-We have yet to see what the conditions are, to be dethroned but I assure you that I'll purge the roster if they should pose a threat. ( your guild will die with this ideal and one day if you want to actually make it a guild of some type pvp pve etc noone will be there with you.)
So yes you are indeed a terrible GL and make me grateful of the guild i have and give me even more reason to help keep it running while my GL does his thing with school.
bruce Sep 27th 2011 6:34PM
If not implemented exactly right I foresee this being the cause of some drama.
(cutaia) Sep 27th 2011 6:43PM
It'll probably stop some drama, actually. This happened rather recently:
http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/200236/blizz-take-guild-from-you-if-your-not-onlin
At least now, there will be very clear rules on how much a guild leader has to log in to avoid a problem.
Snark Sep 27th 2011 7:07PM
Wow, that's messed up. Some precedence would have been nice.
Vitos Sep 27th 2011 9:16PM
There is precedence. I don't know if it is formally stated anywhere, but I know that I've heard from multiple sources that if a gleader is offline for 30 days or more, you can petition a GM for the spot yourself- even if you're the most recent recruit.
This way, you don't have to submit a ticket to a GM AND you have to be high-ranking in the guild, therefore probably an officer and someone who the GL trusts at least marginally.
trefpoid Sep 27th 2011 9:25PM
Wish this had come sooner, actually. The GM in my guild left the game for 6 months where no one could touch the guild in any way, I was left alone with my GF, two friends and leveled the guild from level 8 to 20 in that time and I took up the mantle of replacement GM in that time (even though I didn't have the GM position, but I was the highest ranking Officer). I didn't know I could petition for the GM position or anything. Now he came back, stole the 20k gold me, my GF and my friends collected over that time with cash flow and he kicked all of us from the guild after I asked him why the hell he took all the money without telling anyone. Life's a bitch, eh? Now I started a new guild (we are 4 active members) and are barely managing to get to level 3. Wish I could've taken the guild and avoided all this drama, let's hope this new option avoids problems like this in the future for other people.
brain314 Sep 28th 2011 3:39AM
They are just automating the process. I had to do the same thing myself. I called a GM, who asked if the guild leader has logged on within 30 days. He hadn't for the past 3 months. So after a bit of shuffle, he handed the guild to me. I forget if it was because I requested, or I had the highest achievements or what. It also helped that I knew the GL IRL.
Personally, I think the 30-day logoff is a bit short, but it was a small guild, so 90 days with no membership, vault or policy control wasn't that bad. I'd imagine it'd be worse for a much larger guild.
Balgus Sep 27th 2011 6:36PM
Giving it to a high ranking officer like that is a lot better than giving it to whatever random member decides to mail a GM IMO.
Ali Ahmed Sep 27th 2011 6:40PM
Sweeeeeeet
Ad134 Sep 27th 2011 6:40PM
The interesting thing will be to see what measures are in place to prevent exploitation.
(cutaia) Sep 27th 2011 6:44PM
Probably some of the same measures they already have in place. See this for some details: http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/200236/blizz-take-guild-from-you-if-your-not-onlin
Blizzard's stance is basically going to be this: If you want to abuse this, you will somehow have to force your guild leader to be offline for a month.