Cross factional RP

Moirean · January 2014

I guess we just will have to agree to disagree, then. It feels to me that conflict in Aetolia is at a pretty low point. I think people being off in their own camps has a direct influence on this lack of conflict.

Tralendar · January 2014

Areka said:

So - what would you have had a morally stringent organization do when their members are sexin' up enemies? If you don't like the current limited approaches, offer some new ones other than getting high and mighty about how YOUR orgs don't have these moral qualms.

Edit: To clarify - the current conversation isn't particularly helpful, as very few solutions (other than in clear areas where you can still interact and maintain enemyness flavour which shouldn't be an issue as is) have been offered as to how to maintain organization integrity ("These things are bad and unforgiveable until you give them up, we have zealots and can't/won't compromise our ideals") with balancing those who stray outside of their archetypal foundation (zealots, knights, priests/lums, etc) or look for roleplay that wouldn't be acceptable to the org. Or, how do you make getting married to enemies acceptable?

It's easy really. You relax them. You can be an evil zealot, hell half of the ones around when I was more active were even if they never realized it. It's the overall mission of the organization that is important, how one lives or goes about it are irrelevant as long as it doesn't contradict it. Problem is that everyone is still caught up in the concept that there is a clear cut good/evil divide (there isn't) and that lifers must be the good guys and that everyone needs to conform to the same morality. People need to be enforcing the goals of the organization moreso than the morality a select few people think the guild should have. Do that and a lot of these sorts of problems will go away. You have to trust your members to do what they do, especially if they've given no reason to doubt them previously. It's one thing to ask about something you see as bad, it's another to threaten or punish them for it. This sort of thing happens in some darky organizations, but is far more prominent for the lifers. This shouldn't be a free card to do whatever you want, but you should be able to get away with almost anything that isn't outright treason i.e. helping a raid, giving out secrets, etc. Though things like having cake with an enemy isn't that big of a deal and isn't going to damage anything. Let me give you a quick example here. Tral acting as a portal target for lifers in BL = treason. Tral replanting entire forests (which he does) in BL = indifference as while being a lifer thing, it's not that big of a deal (and lifers aren't very timely at doing this).

In short, the stance of organizations that do this need to change. It's mainly a player driven change that needs to happen in which you trust other characters.

Editted to add: I'm not saying that you can't have righteous people on either side, but the leaders overall need to be accepting of other moralities in their organizations. They don't have to like the people that aren't like them, but if they're furthering the cause, they shouldn't be rejected out of hand for it.

Daskalos · January 2014

Evil Zealot went out the window with Rahn the moment Auresae changed the ethos from Perfection at all costs to Purity of motive. My biggest objection is 'Enorian is doing this' when Enorian isn't doing this. Some of the guilds may, but the city is not. This would be like blaming Spinesreach for something the Sciomancers did.

Jensen · January 2014

I got enemied to Eno for being a guilded Syssin 2 days after switching sides. Prior to the raid I joined (because of being enemied) I had never actually done anything to earn that title.

Areka · January 2014

The mass enemying (which is an issue of debate within the city) isn't the same thing as to whether or not cross-factional RP can/does/is allowed to happen.

Amberlea · January 2014

Moirean said:

A lifer guild is the one who tried to force one of my Carnifex to quit class as the only "acceptable" solution to prevent a lifer she was involved with from being ejected and losing lessons, a situation the lifer guild created by repeatedly spying on their own guildmates.

A situation that was created by the players involved. I totally

the person you are referencing (at least the carni, don't really know the other that well), and Amberlea is kinda guilty here too, but sleeping with people from an org that is supposed to be thematically opposed to your own should at least have the risk of some dirty looks from your mates. I wouldn't jump straight to kicking someone out, but as I understand it that threat was made after like, what, the fourth time? Just because some RP may have a negative impact on a character doesn't make it intrinsically bad RP. The players behind the characters know that there is some risk of backlash and choose to do these things anyways.

Moirean said:

A lifer city is the one who has citizens who threaten PK simply for entering their city while unenemied.

Some people are stupid, rash, or callous. Was it a unicorn move? Yep. Is it bad RP to have characters running around with these flaws? No. You didn't get enemied, and you didn't get killed. I've asked non-enemies to leave Spines before when I was an aide to the Ambassador because I felt their presence was starting to cause a disturbance for people in the city. Granted, I did it politely, but I'm not really sure what the problem is here.

Moirean said:

A lifer city is the one who enemies everyone simply because they are Spirean, without even a single chance for interaction first.

Got enemied to Enorian because I was spirean. I switched sides and got enemied to Bloodloch within a day. Light and dark both do this.

Tralendar · January 2014

Daskalos said:

Evil Zealot went out the window with Rahn the moment Auresae changed the ethos from Perfection at all costs to Purity of motive.

Reinterpret or expand on it. Gods are only supposed to be guiding organizations, not running it utterly. They aren't their order, so not everyone should be held to strictly following Auresae's tenets. They should be respected, but that doesn't mean they need to be followed to the letter. Guilds/cities are player run organizations, players should be the biggest factor in deeming what can be accepted. Evil zealot never went out the window.

Regardless of whether or not it is cities or guilds, it's bad. A lot of my past experience was with Enorian doing this (after association laws officially stopped existing), and I haven't heard of Enorian going through some sort of major reform since to lead me to believe the same sort of attitudes don't still exist and thrive in the city.

Ciarelle · January 2014

Moirean said:

A lifer city is the one who has citizens who threaten PK simply for entering their city while unenemied.

I'm surprised no one's thrown this one out there yet, but Duiran doesn't even protect its own citizens/councilors from PK by other citizens/councilors. It's part of the wild/hunt or be hunted RP. This isn't aimed at you, so don't misunderstand me, but I personally have found a lot to like about it.

Toz · January 2014

Except when they do and you get spammed with enemy/unenemy messages...

Xavin · January 2014

Ugh. That's usually because people say they understand how we do things and then go ahead and show that they don't.

Angwe · January 2014

No one even threatened you with PK for RPing. You were threatened for PK for your location in a place you should logically have expected to be killed for being in FOR RP reasons. RP doesn't stop when it becomes inconvenient.

See my earlier posts about boring, vapid and watered-down 'role play'.

Note: a change of location would have removed all potential danger. Said change of location wasn't even necessary, as you were being vouched for by my character, with the understanding that he was watching you. Note that him watching your character was, in fact, the whole scene.

I'm really failing to see what your complaint is.

Edit: Because I wrote it on my phone and it was an ugly block of text.

Haven · January 2014

It should not ever matter that two people are roleplaying. What should matter is what they're roleplaying and even then it should only matter so far as to how your character might react to what it is that they're doing. That's essentially what it boils down to that I think people find offensive and unicorn worthy; the fact that a group of people are roleplaying in the first place.

If I'm a Lighter and I decide to roleplay with Moirean for a few hours (or maybe even all day) every day of the week, that in itself should not be an issue (i.e., the regularity). If there is going to be an issue at all then it should be about the content of the roleplay at hand. From things as simple and "harmless" as buddying up with her without my organization's agenda in mind (like converting, manipulating, or destroying the enemy by the end goal) to something a bit more complex and detrimental like betrayal. I can understand why it would make certain organizations uneasy and feel offended because not only are there multiple precedents where allies are corrupted or betray the organization in some manner, but the friendly act also challenges their ideals's integrity and begs the question of why the offender is part of the organization in the first place if they did not believe in the core ideals. Even so, association laws do not even address the core issue at hand despite popular belief. Like @Hadoryu says, it's a stamp that merely states: We do not trust ourselves to act in the interest of our organization in the face of the enemy outside of a directly hostile and violent environment.

[spoiler]"Haha, they're not so bad. Why are we fighting them again?" would be the challenge issued with being friendly with no end goal in mind that supports the organization's agenda.[/spoiler]

Daskalos · January 2014

Tralendar said:

Daskalos said:

Evil Zealot went out the window with Rahn the moment Auresae changed the ethos from Perfection at all costs to Purity of motive.
Reinterpret or expand on it. Gods are only supposed to be guiding organizations, not running it utterly. They aren't their order, so not everyone should be held to strictly following Auresae's tenets. They should be respected, but that doesn't mean they need to be followed to the letter. Guilds/cities are player run organizations, players should be the biggest factor in deeming what can be accepted. Evil zealot never went out the window.

Regardless of whether or not it is cities or guilds, it's bad. A lot of my past experience was with Enorian doing this (after association laws officially stopped existing), and I haven't heard of Enorian going through some sort of major reform since to lead me to believe the same sort of attitudes don't still exist and thrive in the city.

Except the Daru and the Luminaries were founded on the basis of the Revelation, which was handed the guilds by Rahn\Auresae. Enorian has gone through a lot of reform, and a lot of things are different. The Daskalos iteration that is leading Enorian now is nothing like the Daskalos of 5 years ago. The Luminaries have moved away, quite a bit, thanks to Macian and some of the stuff we did while he was GM, though all that progress has sort of stalled lately. The Daru are, for lack of a better term, stubborn and entrenched in their ways and I don't know if anything you say or do will change it. Infin tried to change the guild to bring it into modern line, and while he probably didn't go about it the best way, I wasn't all that opposed to the Daru 'stepping forward' so to speak. That being said, they -have- and continue to step forward at the same time.

Much like the Teradrim were 'Dhaivol Order Lite' the Daru have always been 'Auresae\Rahn Order Lite' and the problem is that there's no active Auresae\Rahn, we haven't had a half decent one in several years real life - the last iteration may have been great for her order, but she turned Auresae into a forestal god who cared more about Duiran than anything to do in Enorian. Honestly, if it were me and I had my way, I'd kill Auresae and make a strong run at a return to a Rahn-esque iteration of the fire god, who's more fire and brimstone than purity and love and happiness. And I'm sure some people will come out and say 'well, that's not what Auresae was' and while that may or may not be true, she never showed it outside her own circle of followers. I'm not trying to bash whoever the player was, that's just how I perceived it and how a lot of people did within Enorian.

Aishia · January 2014

"Whateva, I do what I want."

Alexina · January 2014

While I think it makes perfect sense for a number of organizations to outright ban interaction with people from enemy organization, I must say that I am quite happy to hear that this is not the case in Enorian. At the end of the day, this is a game and games are played to have fun. Being told you can't speak to someone you find interesting is the opposite of fun. Personally, I've had many interactions with people on the enemy side, some of which were far from appropriate. Some did not even lead to any interesting interaction or roleplay. But that's just how things work in a sandbox setting; a lot of the excitement comes from not being able to tell the outcome of a specific scenario in advance.

That said, there needs to be -some- sort of feel for what is right and what is wrong for the individuals of a specific organization. Just to offer an extreme and completely irrelevant example, a Tolkien elf that was found parleying or debating or just trying to get to know a bit about an orc they met would be cast out. Now, this is a game that real people play and very strict approaches typically end up making people feel mistreated. It is a fine line, but I suppose my point is this: members of organizations need to uphold the ideals of those organizations to some degree. That degree might vary from guild to guild or from city to city, but it is still there. If people repeatedly disregard your organization's basic ideals, you will end up in a place that lacks identity.

I have no idea where I was going with this post. Basically, people should have the freedom to interact with whomever they want but that freedom should come with the responsibility not to compromise your guild's or city's fundamental ideals.

Aishia · January 2014

Alexina tries to RP at me sometimes and I counter by being a huge jerk.

Alexina · January 2014

I know.

Arbre · January 2014

I have always been very baffled by this whole "Auresae is a forestal god" thing. There were a couple of us in her order that were forestals. Most of us didn't really fit much into -any- kind of stereotype, however, and Auresae was constantly pushing me, specifically, to be more lighter. It's not her fault who decides to join her order; especially since I joined and subsequently went to all my friends (who were mostly forestals) and was like YAY AURESAE #1 JOIN HER ORDER. I haven't figured out yet WHY people listen to me, but they tend to.

She moved her temple from the Peshwar to the Ithmia, which IS a forest. It also is Oniala's old house.

Daskalos said:

I'm not trying to bash whoever the player was, that's just how I perceived it and how a lot of people did within Enorian.

Pretty much the entirety of that iteration of Auresae was you trying to bash who the player was. It's getting old, Dask.

Kerryn · January 2014

Moirean said:

A lifer guild is the one who tried to force one of my Carnifex to quit class as the only "acceptable" solution to prevent a lifer she was involved with from being ejected and losing lessons, a situation the lifer guild created by repeatedly spying on their own guildmates.

I'm fairly certain most only know about half that story. But since it's been brought up, I'll go ahead and speak about it personally as it pertains to me and my guild. The guild member in question was one of the Sentaari, she joined the guild when Duiran was pretty miffed at her about dating said Carnifex, she was even run out of another guild for it (or so I was told). Kerryn spoke to said person, said she understood matters of the heart and that she'd give said person a year to turn the Carnifex or end the relationship. Because that is what the Sentaari do. We are not neutral, we are very much against shadow aligned orgs. The Guild member -agreed- to the terms. Kerryn then turned a blind eye to them being together, believing that it would be resolved soon. After a year, the Carnifex didn't turn and Kerryn was told the relationship was over by the guild member. A few years later, she hears from a third party that no, that was in fact a lie and that they were -still- a couple. Kerryn then went to said Carnifex explained that if said relationship continued ONE of them would have to pay a price and she didn't want to see her guild member hurt. The Carnifex agreed, said she didn't want the person hurt either and would think about it. That conversation happened in...September. It was left alone to see what happened. Once again, Kerryn was under the impression the relationship was broken off as said guild member came and told Kerryn it was over. Then, Kerryn was told yet again by a third party that they were STILL seeing one another. So, Kerryn kept an eye out and sure enough she saw them in a bedroom together in Spinesreach. So Kerryn approached the Guild member. Told her something had to give, that it was against the guilds beliefs for us to be in a relationship with an enemy. She approached the Secretaries at the time about what they though should be done. One wanted to talk to the Carnifex to see if he could turn her. Kerryn was against it, said that it wasn't going to happen. He spoke to her anyways while Kerryn talked to the Guild member. Kerryn told them they needed to choose either their relationship or the guild. That it's not something she enjoyed doing as Kerryn and said guild member were actually fairly good friends. Kerryn was then told that the Carnifex was going to turn, so she told the guild member if the person did that there would be no objections to the relationship and she could continue seeing said person. Even offered to take in said Carnifex in order to see the guild member happy. It didn't end that way, it ended with the guild member leaving. Yes, said guild member lost monk class when they left the guild. Not something I could avoid, in all her time with the guild over 9 rl months, she didn't even do a single requirement to progress within the guild. Requirements which are stupidly easy to do.

This situation didn't happen in a span of a week, it was in span of real life months. Months where there WAS rp leading up to it, rp that was not only with the guild member BUT the Carnifex. There was chance after chance given, it wasn't simply cut and dried after it happened once. A member of a lifer org in a relationship with the enemy isn't ever going to be 'okay'. And lets face it, of course the darkies are not going to say anything because they're happy to corrupt the lifers and they know in the end the lifers will hold said person accountable to their orgs beliefs and none of the lifers orgs beliefs say it is okay to have a relationship with the enemy. This should be common sense. And when lifers confront said person, they leave and the lifers are made out to be the bad guys for holding a person to the beliefs of their org.

The Sentaari as a whole don't care if guild members mingle or talk to the enemy, it's our belief to turn them, help them see the error of their path by spreading knowledge and enlightenment. So I don't take a second look if I see one of the monks with an enemy. Unless it's a relationship, at which point Kerryn will be upfront and honest like she was with the guild member mentioned in the above situation. And even when she hears rumors of relationships, she doesn't go off third party information. She waits to see it with her own eyes before jumping to conclusions and ousting someone.

Damonicus · January 2014

I think this thread has run its course but I learned four things because of it.

One, Enorian: Don't unf the darkie and PRAISE THE SUN.

Two, Duiran: If it is against the Rythym, don't unf it.

Three, Bloodloch: Corrupt it, unf it, kill it, repeat.

Four: Spinesreach: Unf it...FOR SCIENCE!!!