Iron for president!

_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf

I don't think this, but some would say you're wrong. Some think that going AFK/talking OOC -do- have to do with the quality of RP. Not saying that it's wrong to go a little more grey (or saying that I want to), but that you should try to understand why there's hesitation in every aspect because there are people who think this stuff, even if it's not the majority. And when you change something, you can't just go with "majority rules" all the time or it ends up becoming a popularity contest to get things changed. You keep saying there are risks to any of these changes, and so there are. It's not wrong to want to take months of time to think it over. Any of it.



I love this paragraph. Alright. I want you to understand, and everyone, that I don't care about others' feelings nearly as much as you all think I do. In fact, I really don't give a damn about almost anyone. I play this game for fun, I could stop playing and be fine, and I have a very successful and interesting real life. I have living, breathing best friends and I don't provide this "consideration" because I think it's the best way to have a Roleplay server. Or because I want everyone to be my new best friend. I don't. If I could get everyone to love hardcore circumstances, to be an intelligent roleplayer and to be Yossarin (or myself or plenty of other people I enjoy RPing with) I'd be so much more happy! The way you want this place to be is the way that I want it to be too, Iron.

But it's not worth it to me. The fact that it's even worth it to you, Iron, to spend your time trying to change all these players' opinions on what they want to perceive as fun... is almost funny. The reason it's not worth it is because I can have fun without them. I don't need to make other people not have fun to have fun myself. There ARE people on this server who like it more hardcore, you just have to find them. Why try to force everyone under your little banner of self-righteous awesomeness? Yeah, you're right. Yay! You're right! I've been saying it the whole time though.

But you're not right at the same time. These people, these players are right too. They are right that if they want to remain ignorant and they want this place to not even be a greyer hardcore, they have a right to that. If they want to keep all their possessions? Then I don't see why they shouldn't be able to! I'll RP with them when our styles mesh, and if they don't want stuff stolen from them, I'll find someone else to mesh my style with who matches better.

That's what Amia is to me. I agree that we can define it a little better, we can get a little greyer. But I will never, to the end of my days, think that changing a server years down its creation to force other players to lose things they didn't have to lose before is fair for them -- at least not without a fight. They should be able to fight all they want to have things stay the same, and I'll fight for them. I don't agree with them, but they have a right to their opinion. And you can never say that your opinion is better than theirs because you can never claim to know how someone else has fun. You can call their fun "ignorant" I suppose or you can call that kind of fun "selfish" in a way. But if they want to be ignorant and selfish in a game? They can be. That's why.. it's a game.



I've seen things change without OOC collaboration. Sure, the DMs have to collaborate. They have to decide if it's worth changing the world and going through all that effort. But that's necessary. I've seen it change without any player knowledge of their collaboration, and I don't see how that's being powerless.

To be honest I hate the whole "Take one for the team" speeches...or the "You have to lose sometimes" quips....because it's always coming from someone directing it towards someone other than themselves.

There are some players who practically spend their whole game time "losing", and when it's asked repeatedly of them, it gets old.

Just as there are criminals who don't wish to deal with consequences, there are no heroes/guards/policing forces/victims who are able to deal with the IC consequence of being robbed/victimized.

The day criminals will accept consequences, is the day one heroes pain doesn't magically turn into EVERY hero porting in magically knowing of the danger and preventing it.

1) It's a perfectly fine IC response. Running and telling your friends you just got your ass kicked and them coming to help you is something that happens in RL, Politics, Wars, pretty much anything where there are two sides to a conflict.

2) I've always wondered why don't evil people do the same? "Hey guys, I was robbing this dude, then he came back with his friends and tried to kill me. Care to help me out? I'll split the loot with ya."

Banding together on the other side of the spectrum is certainly more difficult, but I'm tired of people acting like it's only Good people that can do it. Network, goddammit.

I do agree with you on one of your points though, both sides have some accepting to do. But there are equally well things that both sides can do already to more easily meet their goals.

Everyone is the "hero" of their own story, to that end an evil person could in fact be considered a hero under the right circumstances. If you choose to play a character who is on the wrong side of the "right/Wrong" debate (I won't say good and evil because frankly those are alignments not character traits, I could easily see an evil aligned character being a member of the adventure guard for example) you are playing the losing side that's how it works in literature, film, and yes Amia. If you can't accept that your cause is doomed from the get go and instead endeavor to make the journey entertaining, then don't play wrong/evil.

Both sides should always be willing to accept the in game consequences of their actions, there is no sense of accomplishment if there are no consequences I get that. However, it is much more common to see wanton disregard of consequence from the evil side of the spectrum. Put bluntly, it's much harder to play a good villain than a good hero for the very reason that a good villain is always destined to fail, it's what the audience wants and expects of him, it's how he fails that matters, all the good guy has to do is win.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. (The following paragraphs I didn't quite don't seem to explain it, either.) Of course I direct whatever I post to someone other than myself. Why would I go through the trouble of posting my thoughts on a public forum if I just wanted to communicate with, well, myself?

I do, however, really want to experience the possibility of bad consequences myself. I don't so much worry about whether you'll miss out on that fun by avoiding all consequences. But unfortunately, it's only possible for me if it's the reality of the server. Sure, there's the nice "Waiver of Protections" form you can fill, but that's unlikely to have much effect in game. The atmosphere of tension and danger can be genuine only if everybody's a potential target or a potential enemy, the practical difficulties aside of checking that long topic every time you meet a new PC. Personally, I often go out of my way to put my PCs in awkward and potentially risky situations, because they ultimately become my fondest RP memories. I don't see how that's relevant to the validity of my points, though.

Estara: I wouldn't go so far as to say anyone has a right to anything here. But you're right: there's no rational reason why my preference is conclusively better than someone else's. But that's unavoidable, and it shouldn't keep us from doing everything in our power to advance our own interests. It is a popularity contest, and it can never be anything else. Popularity among the playerbase or more narrowly, popularity within the DM team. In the end the choice between different styles is an arbitrary judgement on taste. I'd be mad not to want my taste to come out on top, though.

In case there was a misunderstanding, by the way, I didn't direct any of my paragraphs to you. It might seem like that after the mention of your name, though. Basically, I disagree with your stance that we should consider the preferences of other players and facilitate their comfort by bending IC and cutting them slack (even if your motivation is laziness and practicality, rather than any idealism). Well, I don't really disagree with the basic notion strictly formulated like that, because it's always nice to be reasonable. But what many Amians (and thus the general server culture) deems "reasonable" is anything but. In practice, we have to walk on eggshells so as not to accidentally upset someone with RP they "don't prefer." It shouldn't be my responsibility or yours to make sure that the other party is happy with how you RP; it's their responsibility to deal with it and get out IC. In an event I ran as a DM once, I actually had players tell me they didn't really like their RP interrupted with this kind of spooky RP that was out of their social comfort zone. That's what your seemingly sensible policy actually leads to.

_________________

I can't say I agree with this assertion as it's application to Amia as a community is actually rather narrow. Ideally nothing done in game that impacts on a PC is OOC; this includes forming hunting parties and(most galling) trade in items.

In these IC situations the burden of responsibility seems to vanish utterly. One would expect a member of any rightious evil smiting clergy to cast out or even destroy as a traitor any of their members who trade with necromancers or other evil doers.

If the member of clergy in question is unsure of their partner in trade then they could find out (detect evil: 'just ask them OOCly if you can use it, if they say no move on to someone you RPly mesh with'). This is what I would expect of a Good aligned character, particularly Divine based classes, if they were to accept the consequences of being a Good PC. It is the same principal that is applied to Bad Guys dealing with the burden of being bad and yet is never raised as an significant sticking point.

Trade is such a common part of the Amian community that no one considers the IC morality of it. There is much ado about metagameing Guards... I would think it is a far greater offence to metagame Gods.

Also; what Iron said.

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

It's not that long of a topic, you sometimes-overdramatic-Finn! It's only two pages! You spend your time reading so much longer, so much more time consuming material than that. I think you've even made posts longer than that topic! Really though, I do not buy that argument. I am taking it as a "I want it to be for everyone because that's how I want it" and am definitely casting aside any supposed practical difficulty.



Oh, I hope I didn't come off as too invested. I am invested, but simply because I like the argument. I think these people deserve a chance at defending themselves from you and I don't see anyone else with the balls or energy enough to do it. Or maybe they don't read the forums. Or maybe I'm really defending nobody except hypothetical people who (don't actually) care about this server and wouldn't mind any of the changes.

And as for a real response to your comments on the popularity contest and the conflict in policies:

Advance your own interests, I suppose. We can't all be kind souls like me who can just let other (perhaps hypothetical) people play how they want to and invest their time in the people that have a similar mind to them. It's why I like Amia. I oppose your opinion not because it's not what I consider fun or like, but because I have a fear that once we start pressuring the server too hard with real rules toward one direction, it will erupt in flames. And that once we start changing things in my preference, compromises will have to be made that aren't to my preference. And I'm happy the way things are. The forums already erupt in flames over more minor changes than enforcing things like permadeath. So if we do change, I say take it slow. Not the "WE MUST CHANGE NOW" change you want.

But I don't walk on eggshells, and I participate in all of this RP you want. So in my mind.. I think.. "Lazy: Check! Practical: Check!" But also.. "Fun: Check!" And I think, why can't others have the Fun box checked? Maybe because they're too elitist and immersion-obsessed to be able to pick and choose where they want to interact and whom with. And I also think, by being that elitist and obsessive, how many potential players do we lose that already have a Fun box checked and could learn to slowly expand the Fun box to meld better with my Fun box and not be forced into it? Or not be pushed into leaving?

The way I like changing players is not by changing rules, but by letting people choose whether they want to embrace new (and yes, better) ways or not.



And that's not true. That's what you not trying to figure out what people like leads to. Not my policy at all! It might be a mistake that gets made, but it's a mistake that would inevitably get made even in a more hardcore-oriented server. Even players who play on permadeath servers have opinions on what kind of RP they like.

And it seems like you're insulted. I say don't be, and move on.

Estara, I'm not sure exactly what you're saying here.

I understand that you think things are fine the way they are; but I've not seen any reason behind the argument aside from change causes some tensions ala 'better the devil we know'.

The hypothetical 'fun box' you spoke of doesn't really seem applicable. It still carries the undertone of 'hardcore servers are there so go play them' which is not really what the topic was about.

What am I missing in your point?

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

Edited to my first post: Things are fine. I do think that. Specifically, things are fine, I can be happy, but I do agree things aren't the best they could be. However, there are ways others should be able to be happy too without necessarily resorting to rule changing. At least not immediate, drastic rule changing. Or putting down the OOC attitude of those they want the rules to affect.

I think criminals have a lot of work to do, I think the server could use some clarification and I do enjoy myself some more hardcore aspects personally. I'm saying that there is a way to change, an attitude to doing it and that those whose opinions are different deserve some defense to their position and some respect.

Oh and I'm also saying people who cry "There's no fun in Amia at the moment!" are a little crazy.

Was it that hard to understand?

Well it would seem that, based on many of the arguments that have been made, there is a general feeling among a significant area of the player base that those who choose to play a 'bad' or 'criminal' PC are unable to deal with the consequences of their actions and as such giving them yet more power to impact on others RP and PCs would be a poor decision. Hence the 'change causes tensions' argument.

This, to my mind, holds little water as an argument due to the aforementioned inconsistency between the IC actions and implied IC expectations of many 'good' PCs. This may be a demonstration of just why no one should be given these 'powers' but I think you should ask yourself that if, hypothetically, a Good Cleric is able to trade with an Evil Character (ignorance should not be a defence here, if you don't know you should find out first) without being stripped of their divine graces and cast from their church then why should a 'Criminal' not be able to exercise the same 'freedom' of values.

Both situations involve an exchange of goods that should ICly and OOCly be making 'someone' as mad as a cut snake. Exactly who that 'someone' is varies greatly but the clash of values remains.

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

Wait.. I'm confused.. are you comparing a good cleric trading goods with an evil character to being the same sort of thing as criminals being able to steal goods from characters?

(Also, just so you're aware since you don't seem to understand, Iron and I weren't exactly arguing too many of the specifics of criminal RP. We were arguing more about whether those who don't support more hardcore aspects (i.e. permadeath or your ideas of where criminal RP should go) have valid reasoning or are worth considering in the efforts of change. We can apply that argument to the specifics of criminal RP-- and have a little bit-- but we weren't too specific yet.)

whats wrong with dm-enforced punishment, such as character A is caught, they are taken into custody, a trial is held in the city who claims jurisdiction and if found guilty is jailed for said amount of time, and enforce a "2-12 day" no play on that character while is spends said sentence in the jailhouse. >.< in extrema cases could be death penalty, but there should always be opportunity for the persons to avoid it, by serving jail time, or perhaps turning sides or leaking information.

i honestly love the idea of my rouge being captured and spending time icly in jail, could perhaps even set the characters bind point to a special bind in a jail cell in the corresponding city, i can rp sitting around and talking to guards try and "get" message out or try for a great escape,.

>.< perhaps im totally of topic hear but it seems like everyone's going of on random jaunts.

atm IC consequences are... lame we dont get jailed, we dont get anything neat happen its usually beheaded and buried in a hole and we cant play till someone finds us lol, what happened to fair trial. ( i know there have been some) but perhaps the Law should do more and adventures taking the law into their own hands are vigilantes and should be deblt with the same hmm..

_________________
If i am not about when you are, but you would like to RP with Valkin, chose a time in red (GMT+8) / add character name PM me ICLY/OCC :http://teamup.com/ks662ccbfedda01eb0/

"Both situations involve an exchange of goods that should ICly and OOCly be making 'someone' as mad as a cut snake. Exactly who that 'someone' is varies greatly but the clash of values remains."

I was attempting to give the argument context, albeit a little clumsily.. As to "my ideas of where criminal RP should go", as I said earlier, all of these are just postulations thrown out to stimulate debate and guage reaction. Don't take them to heart.

Also, I think I'm justified in requesting a little less condescension in your replies.

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

Yeah so I wn't complain..just simply list all the possible things that can occur in any criminal RP:

1. Criminal can't commit a crime cause of technical reasons (racial gates, racial nodes, non pvp areas, metagamed guards)

2. DM intervention prevents, well, any destruction of property, attacks, etc.

3. Victim protests IC and OOC. Calls griefing, or ANY oher violation they can trump up.

4. Victim sends tells to friends (ie metagaming that can't be prevented), so the calvary arrives just as victim is dying.

5. Magical Calvary arrives and criminal, now outnumbered and defeated OOCly cries foul.

6. Victim claims immortality.

7. Criminal, now dead, claims immortality.

8. Calvary gets OOC mad at Criminal.

9. Criminal can't understand how calvasry even knew what was happening to show up.

10. players fight and call names.

11. One player says "We need to get a DM"

12. DM sighs then tries to resolve issue.

13. DM chooses one side (usually good), and criminal cries foul.

14. ALL players scream at DMs and blame them.

15. DMs slap the ban, scream back, or get sad.

If there's anything I left out when it comes to criminal RP let me know. BTW, some players do send tell to each other who are evil and such, in fact every evil faction does.

The problem with not letting criminals be criminals is that you lose the BEST villains in the game...other players...and when every one plays good all that's left are the NPC monsters, and though the DMs do a good job in creating them, it makes for a lousy game just fighting those.

Actually, I disagree. Criminal RP can work with all sides involved showing fairness and compromise as needed.

It can ruddy well work.

It does work.

Stupid criminal RP doesn't work, in that case it mirrors life, because stupid criminals go to Jail.

_________________
I play: Gage le Gris
Socially and recently politically Inept Knight of Xymor

1: The topic is buried in the forums, it is relatively long, and it's, well, a forum topic. Whenever you see a PC in game, you have to alt-tab out of NWN, search the topic for names, and hope they've bothered to fill in the form for this specific PC. Yes, it can work and it's better than nothing. However, it certainly won't change server culture. It's a painkiller, not a cure.

2: I'm not sure if you're saying that I should try to figure out what players like, or simply stating an observation. If it's the former, I absolutely disagree: you should never have to do that. You should figure out twisted and awesome stories and challenges to throw at other PCs, and it's their responsibility to overcome or avoid them. This goes for both DMs and players. The fact that a player has the gall to tell another player, let alone a DM, that they should be left alone because they don't like where this RP is going, speaks a lot about Amia's culture. If we've come to the point where people think they have the "right" to pick and choose what they want and expect other players to give them only that and nothing else, change is needed.

I am dramatic because our situation is dramatic. And it has been for years. What I want is a change in attitude and server culture; practical details are secondary. That's why I have to be radical and dramatic. It's up to the DMs to exercise moderation and hammer out the details, but there's a fundamental decision to be made first: do we let players stay in their isolated sandbox and be in control of their PCs, or do we wrest control from them and let everyone affect everyone else equally.

3. I'm not insulted at all. I'm actually enjoying this. I don't want to move on, though, until there's a change in Amia's culture.

_________________

This.
And what Burningoutbright has stated previously pretty much covers it.

_________________

The thing is, though, you don't go to jail. Not on Amia. You can just say you don't want to. And then we need to get DMs and this becomes an OOC issue, ruining all the fun even if the criminal eventually does his time.

And of course, the criminal should be able to silence a snitch for good, threathen guards and actually have potential profit to make. (This can be concrete loot or it can just be succesful change in the environment.) You can't expect criminals to accept consequences if everyone else isn't subject to the same risk. If a stupid criminal risks jailtime or execution, a stupid guard should risk dying on the job and a stupid adventurer should risk losing his purse. I'm not taking one side or the other, and I have no idea how it is to play a guard or a criminal on Amia. But clearly it doesn't work, or else we'd see way more of it.

_________________

Like i said.

Why dont we have Jail sentences enforced icly, just extend the period, and add the enforced amnesia rule to PVP, characters pvp do not recall the past 24hrs of game-play or some such.

But as you said there is a flip side......

As a Thief or as a murder we "Get" nothing in most cases. As you said atm we cant stop them from just talking later on or stop them from continueing "speaking" to the authorities.

As for theft most of it can be RP but as its not enforced just like the jail & death in many cases we get nothing out of it >.<.

I say crank it all up a notch, get the staff talking about to what level, but ultimately a little more risk and profit from play on Amia that didn't require a dm oversight would be great.

just some ideas and such

_________________
If i am not about when you are, but you would like to RP with Valkin, chose a time in red (GMT+8) / add character name PM me ICLY/OCC :http://teamup.com/ks662ccbfedda01eb0/

I like your numbered solution. Alright, so I can think of many ways to down the hassle of the topic. Go through one day (for about an hour, maybe) and make a list of it. Then you can refer to something you've created and not have to alt-tab. Solves the time issues. And there can be debate here about whether it's a painkiller or a cure.

If everyone bought into it, it'd be a cure. It's just not because everyone hasn't... yet. I agree that it's improbable that they will, but it's not impossible.

And well, if it's a painkiller, not a cure... my questions have incessantly been: "Are you sure what you want is really a cure? Or will it just prove to give us more problems than it cures?" Because so far, I've seen no evidence that it will really cure more than it's potentially sacrificing-- in fact, in past precedent, we have seen that it doesn't cure but moreso proves to make it worse. So I'm wondering what will be different this time. Rather than bashing our collective heads at a wall, let's sit and think more about how to get through it than doing the same old.

So far all I know that works for this place are painkillers. And I'm content to live that way, because it's worth it. Rather have that than risking my less painkillers for more painkillers. Prove to the DMs/me/players how your dramatic changes will be different than others that have been implemented and give it a reason to be trusted. Give me a reason to think you have a vaccine and not just another version of painkillers that might turn out to give me even worse side effects than the random headache or so I get right now.



We're arguing in circles on this point. I have continually agreed that where you want to go with the server is a better place. That is how I like to play and that is the way I like to play. But Amia, as has been pointed out, supports all kinds of players. It is unfair to judge them for having that "gall" when they have been set-up for it by the way this place was created.

I will continually point out that to keep one's sanity and happiness it would be easier to just figure out who wants to participate in your kind of RP-style. And I will continually say that they have this "right" because of the way the server is set-up. It is less hardcore and we do have a lot of trouble-prevention rules that keep a lot more hardcore rules from being set-up. Therefore we have a lot of players who don't want hardcore or who don't want to feel fear or who don't want that sort of environment, because they have been able to get away with it for so long. And that's not their fault.

Anyway, on a side note, you are trying to ride the middle line here. As a DM, you had the power and the right to go after these characters and run them to the ground and leave them there dead. Or have them there fearing you and hating you. Why didn't you keep going? If you want to enforce these situations on someone, being a DM is a perfect way to do it. After all, Yoss has done it multiple times.

Or instead of picking and choosing who loves your RP-style, why didn't you seek out those who didn't and attempt to teach them through IC means how to enjoy something like that? You could change their attitudes that way, instead of throwing these dramatic paragraphs at them that they might not even be reading on the forums.



I can't believe I'm not agreeing on something being dramatic. I'm so overdramatic in real life! But it does come with how I rate this game comparatively to real life. It is not a substitute for me nor do I garner the same blessings from the game as many other people.

I believe the fundamental decision to be made is one that's been made, trying to be put into effect, and frankly the reason DMs get so burnt out. I think the DMs do want to wrest control from everyone, let everyone affect each other equally, but also make sure they're doing it in moderation and with the least amount of dramatic results possible. There are so many cans of worms we open when we wrest control. And so many cans of worms one opens when one begins to give that wrested control over to the playerbase (i.e. getting into the criminal RP detailing). I wonder if DMs are seeing your comments as discouraging, because I think a lot of them are trying to do exactly this. Just not the way you're wanting them to.

I support the venue it's going down now, and I support both sides of the argument. I agree that one side is better, but I support why people want to be selfish and controlling in a game they choose to play for fun. It does make sense, whether it's something one agrees with or not. And I want to change it, but I'm not convinced in the least that the ways you want to change it are the best ones.



Oh, I meant move on from thinking those people did it to insult you. It seems you place blame on these people who don't want Amia's culture to change, and you think they're intentionally responsible for your perceived horrible situation, and I don't think they deserve it. I'm glad you're enjoying it too!

Well it can't be solved with bland, general answers like "play a smart criminal then".

Honestly I find that rather insulting to those who actually do try to play the smart criminal, who, regardless of how a non criminal sees, has to account for not only a good crime but also metagaming and other issues.

That's like me saying "well maybe if you actually RP'd more intelligently, you'd have better criminals."

You can't just give some one liner that states a positive and expect THAT to make all the difference.

It seems a lazy cop out to just say "It does work, just be smart". It's rude. It's insulting....and it doesn't help.

I think this was said somewhere in the five pages of hot air being vented in this thread.
But, it is true none-the-less.

_________________

Good post. I'll try to be brief in my response, this time.



I agree that it can be useful like you described. However, my issue is not about using it myself: I play a paladin, I have no intention of ambushing anyone anyway. For it to be truly effective, everyone else would have to use it too. Otherwise my name is just another on a long list of PCs who won't have to fear getting attacked or sacked, because the majority of the criminal population don't use it effectively. It's not impossible that this will change spontaneously, but it's so improbably that it might as well be. The thing is, there will be no change to this general issue unless it's a forced one. We can either accept forceful change or give up the idea of change altogether. I've been on Amia long enough to have seen that the slow changes we've had have been the result of much fighting, dramatics and forceful decisions.



I don't need evidence to know that I'd prefer an environment where IC actions had IC consequences. However, I've had only positive experiences from other servers and in Amian circles where people willingly gave up the OOC protection of the rules. And more importantly, I'll take risk and change over stagnancy and self-contentment any day. I guess that's a matter of taste, but I don't put much value on preserving some precious equilibrium, when there very well isn't one and any change we make can easily be reverted again.



Well, it boils down to choice. What Amia was originally built on has become gradually more irrelevant. And so it should be: we should decide what we want here and now, not what some players assumed they were getting into five years ago. You and I actually don't agree: the type of RP we want may be similar, but you're willing to be eclectic. I'd rather not be. The choice is between a pick-and-choose sandbox and a more uniform story setting. You've chosen the former, even if you can choose the kind of RP you'd find in the latter. It's not the same, though. This is a critical point that not many seem to get: you can't have a neutral server. Amia is not about facilitating everyone. It has chosen in favor of New Age individualism. It just happens to be that something more "hardcore" is seemingly possible in that sandbox too, but in reality it's just a poor substitute.



Good question. I guess there are a few reasons. First of all, most of this attitude developed towards the end of my DMing and even moreso after that. Secondly, it's not very fun to DM something that the players aren't enjoying. Thirdly, I do believe more in policy and rules than leading by example: you can save the world one person at a time, or you can force everyone to save themselves or drown. But I guess what it boils down to is also part of why I left the team: I wasn't a very good DM. I didn't have the motivation and faith in Amia I would've needed.

_________________

By using the past to say we should only use forceful changes, you're basically admitting to anyone that it's okay for them to use the past to say we shouldn't change at all because none of the others really worked. Your basis is just as good as theirs and it's all a matter of preference.

Also, about the changes that could be made being able to be reverted back?-- you don't know that. We might lose tons of players who don't even know it changed back, there could be tons of bitching about going back, etc... changing back might be just as hard as changing in the first place.



Agree to disagree, then. You even proved yourself wrong I think. By being "willing" to be eclectic, that does not mean it is my preference. I absolutely want the kind of RP that is dangerous, and I think you'll find it's the type of RP I will always choose over others types of RP. It's just that I like Amia, I like my characters and I like the people here. So I settle. You're right in that I can be happy to settle, and I don't see why others can't be, but just because I'm settling doesn't mean that I don't agree or desire the kind of RP you want. It just means I'm more content to be eclectic, not interested in fighting for it as forcefully, nor do I know the best way to go about how to do it at the moment-- and I especially do not like forcefully.



I see your point on why you left, and see this is where you are kind of like me. Laziness and practicality won over when it came to your DMing! I disagree on the first part in that I don't think it developed at the end. I think you just became more oriented toward your type of RP, toward your type of approach toward it and expanded out of your comfort zone of players who you had already established a type of RP with. In fact, I -know- of players who played when you played with the characters you played back in the day that do -not- share your RP-style (be it intentionally or unintentionally).

You're confusing two things, if you're referring to my next paragraph about not resting comfortably on the past: we can use empirical data to guess how things will work out, but that's different to taking our values and choices from a past ideology. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by past changes not working, because the things I've suggested aren't remotely like anything we've ever done on Amia before, while the smaller changes we've implemented along the years have in fact worked out for the better of the server. What little evidence we have on Amia suggests that change towards the more serious was good for us. No OOC outs from PvP, certain restrictions on special characters, limiting IC access to places as an IC consequence, etc. These are all changes for the better in the five years I've played. It's a direction we've already taken, successfully, it's just not enough by a long shot.




Haha, I'm not sure what that last sentence means. That people who've also been here for 5+ years don't all agree with me? Well, that's a given. However, you're wrong about me. The type of RP I personally prefer has remained similar over the years, true. But my ideas about what to do with the server are rather new. I used to be all about free choice, absolutely no official bias towards one style over another, facilitating as large as possible a playerbase etc. If you'd asked me about permadeath, long-term imprisonment or actually muggings two years ago, I would've told you it can't be done on a multiplayer server and that players need OOC protection. Some events started changing my mind, and I guess it was ultimately Kjetta's corrupting influence that drove me over the line. Then I went to play on other servers and saw all this working just fine, and I realized it's not just an utopia. Amia is just too stubborn in holding onto what it's used to.

_________________

Bravo good sir!

That is the kind of "rolling with the punches" That makes good RP! IT is the people that go against everything in the RP that ruin it.

_________________
- "The fiend is less hideous in his own shape....then when he rages in the breast of man"

Two things;

1. Where did you go? I'm curious to see that sort of thing in action, just to test my reactions as a player to such things happening.

2. QFE.

_________________
Jack Tesilent - Jack's Bio

*Amia's players

_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham

Fix'd quote for Tormak, since he is sort've right.

_________________
Jack Tesilent - Jack's Bio

That's probably rather correct. It's also on the DMs, though: you're not too stubborn to hold onto what you're used to, and you do make the daily effort, but I think you'd have to actually ignore the wailing of the stubborn players and force them to move on if you wanted a dramatic change. You probably don't think it's worth the trouble and risk, but waiting for players to grow up and develop a shared vision on their own is wishful thinking that leads nowhere. What you should do depends on what you want, of course.

_________________

I think we disagree on other things that end up making us disagree on this, Iron. Wishful thinking is never something I want to degrade or take away or ignore. I believe that wishful thinking is the foundation of many things that are amazing. I am practical and I am lazy, but I am also wishful. I am wishful in that I will almost never use force over slow, repeatedly attempted coercion. I believe in taking the route of letting them choose than forcing them to accept.

The last post's comments in regards to mine were just weird. You said you didn't understand what I was saying, but what I said was based off of what you said. So if you didn't understand me, it means you didn't understand yourself. You said the "player's attitudes" changed in the years you've been here-- I said "no, yours did"-- and then you proceeded to tell me you were confused. And then admitted to how your attitude was the one that changed. Soo.. I think you confused yourself!

Anyway, glad we had that conversation! And yes, Tormak is right. It is mainly the players that are stubborn.

I still think they have a right to be!

Oh and the changes that didn't work? Or maybe I should say, the status quo that didn't? Having any sort of PVP Cordor, giving any sort of responsibility to (large groups of) criminal RPers to act maturely, accept consequences and not react with horrible, dramatic OOC with results in having DM intervention regardless of there being rules in place or not? -- those are the things you are advocating which didn't work. Which is why some of the rules are in place that are in place. And I'll freely say that all of these things are problems that continue to persist with the drow. Evil characters (overall, not all of them) tend to have players that are more.. vibrant personalities and.. more difficult.

Right... this is going to sound insulting Estara so sorry in advance. That last post overflowed with superiority. Telling someone they confuse themselves and are unable to understand their own argument is usually the kind of argumnet used when no logical alternative presents. I personally found Irons arguments pretty straight forward when seperated from the content he said himself was personal experience.

Again, any input aside from 'it didn't work before so we shouldn't try it again' and 'people that play criminal characters are emotinally unable to accept consequence'?

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

Really? I usually just admit to not having any argument if I don't have one. I'm not that pathetic, billy. Sheeze! I guess it came across condescending because I literally think he did confuse himself? So if that's mean, I guess?

Here goes with the specificity about how he confused himself:



1. He states the player opinion or RP-style or whatever you want to call it developed later, not earlier.
2. I made the point that I KNOW the opinion did not develop later, and that it has been prevalent in Amia from the beginning. (This opinion or RP style or what have you being that you can choose your own consequences and fighting/bitching/complaining about all said factors involved. My knowledge being that I know many of the players/characters/etc that Iron does, and know that he involved himself with such extensively and I have done the same.)
3. I made the point that I think he just developed his distinct distaste for other styles later-- and that that is part of the contributing factor to why it seems that "players developed different opinions" later-- but I really think it is mostly him

Then his next post:



"Some events started changing MY mind" --namely Kjetta. IRON went somewhere else, came back, and has admitted to his mind being changed in the process. But he comes back and is now saying it's the players that changed and not him... but how can he know, when he changed?! And my point is that, it was him.



Seems to be confusing himself to me! But... dunno. I could just be stupid and not getting it. (Which isn't meant to sound sarcastic. It very well could be what's happening.)

So, now that we've established that that the thread is going way of topic can we bring it back to what it was aiming at or are we out of steam?

- Does anyone have any specific suggestions for mechanical changes or rules changes?

- Any suggestions as to where the specifics could be; theft limited to job system, to job systems items, etc.?

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

Why do you need to be able to steal from players, without being able to be stolen back from, to RP "criminal RP" on Amia?

_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham

Was just an idea. And being stolen from isn't a concern for me; I mean if they can steal it back more power too them. I'm not saying that something of this kind is needed to RP a criminal, rather that it could introduce an element of loss or fear of loss without allowing the theft of 'hard won' loot and the like.

Items created through the job system are essentially infinite. The fear of loss would not be so substantial as to make people afraid to leave their city but it may make them reconsider traveling alone if they are carrying a few bars of mithril or the like.

This kind of thing would also introduce the trafficing in stolen goods as a tangiable crime. Job system items are tagged when created(one could assume a guild or crafters mark) and as such any items reported as stolen to the various authorities around the traps would become 'hot'. Trading them in cities or selling them to reputable dealers would no longer be possible. Granted this would rely on the player in question being honest OOCly about the theft of said goods and not meta-selling(?) despite the items stolen goods status.

A real trade in stolen goods may also stimulate organizations like the Crafters and Traders federation to employ a stricter tradeing regime. There is a merchant ally in the new South Cordor; it would be good to see it used. Organizations that contain an abundance of fighters could find employ guarding traders. Just thought it could open a new dynamic in PC relationships; people that usually would not come into contact seeking eachother out for safety.

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

Are stolen items then tagged as stolen? And could they then be dropped in the case of a pvp death? Just throwing out ideas.

_________________

We use the stolen tag for quest items and plot items at times, making that a not-entirely-possible idea.

_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham

Estara: Despite the logical structure of your post, I don't follow.

I never said my personal RP preference is a recent thing. I have been talking about my desire to move Amia into a more uniform direction, because I've come to think that the excessive individualism and pluralism we've had so far (and which I've enthusiatically defended, too) doesn't work too well in the end. At this point it's impossible to say what kind of RP I liked five years ago, and I'm sure there's been plenty of change in that regard. But the decision to support stricter rules and a more "deal with it" attitude officially is a conscious and recent one. I used to think Amian pluralism was essential to its nature, and the freedom to pick and choose your flavor of RP without outside interference was a necessary protection against griefing. That's where I've turned around.

I'm not sure why you insist that I said other players have changed and Amia has become "softer" or more pluralistic. I said there's been slow change, but it's been for the better (from my perspective). Amia has undeniably become more mature over the years. Is this where you misunderstood me? I can't be bothered to go over my posts in detail because I'm on a lesson right now, but I am quite sure I never said, let alone meant, that the "good old days" were more mature than today. Cordor was horrible, but there's no reason we can't do better.

_________________

I know what you said. And that last post you even agreed with me more. I'm just not getting how you're not getting what you said! That's all.




-- see, we know that is not true at all. That's all I was saying, that's all I've been attempting to be saying. You even gave me hard evidence to defend with when you said Kjetta changed your mind and your last post just gave more! My (confusing?) point is that you changed and the playerbase attitude didn't. It was just saying don't make claims about players when the change is mostly yours!

Edit: Unless, of course, the entire time you meant your -own- attitude... and then, well, yes, I was just being stupid!



And billy, I hate to break it to you, but your topic broaches all of the side-topics that Iron and I went down. It wasn't meant as a hijack and if it was, I apologize. But there are reasons people (and at least myself) are against some of these changes and a lot of them don't have to do with small issues and incorporate a lot of other things.

Also, what you're suggesting about stealing job system items just doesn't compute with how you're supporting all of Iron's arguments. You want dramatic change, but you'll settle for something small (and in your minds) insignificant? If you're going to fight this hard for something, it seems you want to fight for something dramatic. And if you're not the type who can settle, why are you settling? Fight for the big stuff-- you might win me over at some point. You just haven't yet.

..and you're not winning me over by asking for my advice on how to fight myself. One: If I wanted to fight my own opinion, I would. 2. We've given you a quite a bit already, and it just seems like nothing is enough until something is changed right now. I think Yossarin says this every day in the Requests forum. You gotta figure it out-- not only is it more impressive that way, but it also will feel better for you if you finally do.

Haha, yes. I get it now. I did mean "most of this attitude of mine."

_________________

HaHA!

I re-read the whole topic and you're right, it does raise the side topics you were discussing, so I'll apologize for any surley sounding responses I've made in that respect.

As to the Job System theft suggestion; the reasons I'd suggest something like that as opposed to dramatic alterations to the death system and the like are mainly derived from the arguments you and others put forward. To some people a suggestion like that is a dramatic one and alienating a part of the player base isn't my goal at all.

Wether or not I'd personally like to see some more significant IC consequences is not really the point. I was looking specifically at criminal RP. If the DM and Dev team decide that other changes would be needed if this was to be put in place so as to make the changes balanced then I, of course, defer to greater experience in game development.

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

If Madison Marmalade gets jumped and someone steals his key to the Temple Ruins, isn't that part of the plot?

The only thing I could see it messing with would be DC items marked as Plot. I'm sure there's a way around that though, hopefully without making a retroactive change.

DC items are the only thing you shouldn't be able to steal willy-nilly, anyway. Maybe custom-crafted mythal stuff too, but I'm not too worried about that.

_________________

I'm not asking that the stolen items have the 'stolen' tag added to them. That would defeat the purpose a bit... I mean, if a PC neglected to report the items stolen then who would know? It is in this instance that Player responsibility is needed.

Thefts like this from other PC's would likely fall under the same catergory as assassinations. RP justification in the form of scouting the 'mark', perhaps even DM oversight. I'm not supporting 'open season' on theft or anything. Poorly executed attacks and thefts would and should fail.

_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."

If it was limited to only stolen stuff or things marked as Plot, I'm not so sure it would be an issue.

If someone steals something from you, it's marked as Stolen. If/when you kill them, things marked as stolen become pickable. Therefore, what was stolen from you, you can steal back.

I agree though, it does become a problem when really heavily mythalled or dc things get stolen. Perhaps have what can be lifted off a body be dependent on the CL's of the two involved and the innate price of the item?

A epic stealing a lowbies highest item isn't all that nice. A lowbie coming across the body of a dead epic and lifting his Excalibur wouldn't be nice. But epic killing/looting/pickpocketing another epic for an item with a base price of about 20,000 is a little more worthwhile for the taker and not as big a deal for the taken.

Maybe even just limit the items that can be looted/taken from a body by CL of who it's being taken from. A moderate value item from the person for whatever level they are, but nothing that would be completely irreplacible or absolutely crippling.

It wouldn't be known. Not to the player or who's buying it. IMO, no merchants on Amia should have the "No Stolen Goods" boxed checked. For Plot items, yes, but not Stolen. If you stole or looted a non-dc moderately priced item from a PC, successfully got away be it through flight or fight, you should be able to sell it.

Marking things as Stolen alone wouldn't defeat any purpose, it just would allow for things that should be stealable to be stolen, back and forth. It's merchants that have the OoC "No Stolen Goods" that muck it up.