Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 3.7K All Categories
- 3K The Midnight Age
- 757 Announce posts
- 125 Newbies
- 6 Class Guides
- 804 Harpy's Head Tavern
- 57 Echo Canyon
- 310 Self-Affirmations
- 163 Town Crier
- 135 The Exchange
- 167 Sparring Grounds
- Combat Guides
- 30 Combat Logs
- 188 Idea Box
- 9 Classleads
- 578 Roleplay Logs
- 107 Aetolia Development
- 5 The Void
- 744 Miscellaneous
- 9 Announcements
- 417 OOC Chat
- 217 Tech Talk
- 47 Scripts
Looking for more active discussion? Join our Discord at https://discord.gg/x2s7fY6
Comments
On to my musings, and please correct me if I have any facts wrong.
After the comms were stolen, the people of Enorian were outraged, understandably so, and they reached out to the other side in attempts to negotiate. From what I understand, the response to these attempts was essentially "No, not giving it back, ever."
Why was this response taken at face value? In comparison, the multiple curses on a full 100 days, which would essentially cripple the entire organization for over three RL months, was only taken at face value by a very small number of people. Why is this? These are my own musings, and other might disagree, but hear me out:
I believe the reason for the first one is that there have been orgthefts in the past by people who have not cared one wit about the consequences or other people involved, and so people's judgment is colored by this. "If they say so, they must mean it. Everyone else who stole this much has meant it, and they're unicorns, ergo these people are unicorns." Even though there are reasons behind such a way of thinking, this kind of argument is not a healthy one, and I believe it might have caused more harm than necessary in this situation.
As for the second example, we are back at how people view previous actions such as these. Players know that there is little risk of this being an actual threat, and more of a "We'll fix it when you do as told. We're doing this to force negotiations". To be honest, this is what I meant by saying it takes time to bring people to the table. Maybe, just maybe, if the response from the Syssin had been taken as that of a recalcitrant enemy than a player who is out to ruin the game, things would have been a bit different. It's not something we will know now, but perhaps something that could at least be considered for the future.
I understand that there was a lot of OOC communication going on behind the scenes, and that there were hateful messages sent almost straight off the bat. This is most likely because emotions were high, and it can sometimes be difficult to pace oneself when one feels monumentally screwed. This does not help anyone to get back on track when it comes to RP solutions, however. Did anyone check if they ought to take this at face value, before exploding OOCly about the unfairness of it all? And if someone did and received no response, consider the situation and take into account that there might have been a general overload of communication at that point, meaning some messages might have been set aside in favor of survival, explaining and trying to sort out IC matters. Perhaps there was a lot of stress in all corners. Not making excuses for anyone, just trying to picture the situation and realizing how much I tend to miss when there's a general overload in mass-character RP.
Everything happened quite fast, from what I understand. Some people took it upon themselves to return the comms without letting others in on this development, making all other actions relatively moot. This includes, for example, allowing the city of Spinesreach as a whole to grasp the situation and weigh in (and let the city leader actually have a part in discussions), possibly force the Syssin to undo what they had done, finding other potential ways to make the Syssin repent through RP or raids (which have happened as retaliation anyway), and even Divine measures, like the curses that were meant to drive the Syssin to the negotiating table, since there was nothing to negotiate for anymore. Did the Divine not see this happening either? Is that why they still went ahead with the curses?
Naturally, I also wonder if it was necessary to steal all the comms in order to make a point. Would the response have been similar (without the OOC anger and resentment that comes with orgtheft) if something like all the shields from the Templar shield wall had been stolen? Or if some extremely important Enorian artifact was taken instead? If so, then it is important that none of these options are available from a player's perspective, as they require Admin assistance. Should all conflicts have require Admin assistance? If not, then what is actually acceptable, and how can one start up a long-lasting conflict without the other side pulling in Admin help in order to secure a victory?
As @Toz mentioned, too many people in this game are bent on winning, and never losing. I find it admirable, the way he went in to this, knowing that it would end up in a loss. I am just very sorry that the loss for him was more overwhelming than anticipated. At the very least, it feels like this has opened up discussions on how to improve certain things, both with proper counter measures for huge thefts, but also the need for conflict systems. I think I'll dig up my old suggestion on small-scale, organization-based conflict systems that was rejected in favor of more large-scale systems two years or so ago.
We took the "no you won't get them back" at face value because of the people who we knew were involved. People who, we as a side of the game, have really had nothing but bad, dare I say *toxic* interactions with. Because of who we KNEW was behind it, we took it at face value and began scrambling.
I've often wondered why they didn't take something less crippling, but more POWERFUL to take. I can think of a lot of things that would've had the same anger response, maybe even MORE so, and longer lasting even. Sure, it might've required admin help, but since there are clearly admin who think there was excellent rp done here (Which I won't argue one way or another, I don't have the fight in me) they could've gotten some help. It would've been easy, would've made conflict and wouldn't have crippled an entire org.
But, I know why they didn't go this route. I know because, well, it's just the latest in a long line of things that has lost me players. But I can only hope I can help my guild and city recover. It's my job to, so no matter how bummed I am? I'm gonna do it.
As a lesser note, as I recall the only reason Ethne "went first" was because she was the first one to log in after it happened. Not everything has deeply significant meaning, either IC or OOCly.
Most of the time, cities of both Shadow and Spirit are open to side-hoppers, because most people have hopped at some point of their Aetolian career. As was stated, most of our most loved characters have side-hopped. I've side-hopped more than I would like to admit, because at times, I just stagnate in my rp and I need to rejuvinate it. It's a way for me to bring the fun back into the game. To do new things and meet new people. So we CANNOT deny side-hoppers entrance into cities.
Very often, these side-hoppers have immense knowledge about loads of things. That means they will become aides to ministries, or even Ministers, in a short amount of time, if they are well liked. It has happened before, it's not uncommon. I would much rather prefer younger chars be given a chance, but hey, I don't run cities.
The point is, though, that this game is, most often, very welcoming to people wanting to switch sides and that is a GOOD thing. Atarah abused that. She abused it and turned it into something ugly. After the last time Fezzix and gang went on a thieving spree, I had her leave Spinesreach, because I hate that sort of rp. I eventually went back without joining another city and I really thought that it was a one time thing, because of the outcry at the time that happened. And now, this happened. I had no other choice than to instantly leave and let me tell you...
I was sure Sessi wouldn't be let back into Enorian because of what happened. Thankfully.. She was allowed to join. That, to me, shows that despite their spirit being broken, they are still welcoming, though very carefully so. I would love to have Sessi get involved in things in Enorian right now, but I won't even ask to be involved, because I know the city is hurting and their trust in people is hurting. So I have to put a damper on my rp for now and stay in the low, until I feel I can start being more active again, without having to worry about their trust.
So no matter if it is not "breaking the rules" or "things were given back", the trust was broken and that can take ages to rebuild. I'm not a combatant myself, but I never want to see RP hurt people like this because there's no way to ignite conflict between organizations. I have full trust in Tiur to make that happen, even if it might take some time.
Don't misunderstand me, I can understand why people were upset.
And that, I think, is where you're sort of overlooking the meta-context that we're all unconsciously buying into when we play this game. There are rules to moderate our behavior; mechanical systems for governing what conflict there is; there is, inescapably, the knowledge that this is a game and our characters are constructs.
I think what you're doing here is idealizing IC/OOC separation, which - while a nice idea - doesn't in practice really exist. We're still human beings behind a keyboard. Our IC actions are, to a greater or lesser degree, constrained by the OOC context of the fact that this is a game. We are bound by norms - by roleplaying conventions that dictate how we use language, says, emotes, and other mechanical skills in the context of a scene.
Norms are unavoidable. They are inevitably an OOC intrusion. There is no pure, unspoiled, pristine IC realm totally separate from OOC considerations, and in trying to say so, I think you're trying to excuse bad behavior that goes against these norms.
It is certainly unworkable and absurd to expect that nobody should get their feelings hurt, ever, at all, but what I object to in your thinking - and what I believe you've left unexamined - is the idea that we're not responsible to each other, nor responsible for each other's fun.
IMO, that's a really great way to think of Aetolia if you want Aetolia to wither up and die.
We're a community. We're responsible to each other. What's been valuable, again and again, in building Enorian as a community, is a mutual, shared assumption of good faith on both IC and OOC levels. I think it is inarguable that Atarah exploited this context in order to perform an action that, while legal per the game rules, was nevertheless enormously destructive and antisocial.
You're prioritizing the rules above people; I think Enorian's playerbase, largely, prioritizes people over the rules. We want people to have fun. We do consider other peoples' fun our responsibility. The reason we don't engage in org theft, extended raiding, and the like isn't necessarily because we hate conflict - it's because that sort of conflict has no point except to demoralize the players behind the characters.
It is absolutely exhausting extending a degree of consideration and basic fairness that has, time and time again, failed to be reciprocated, both in interactions with players on the other side as well as in various admin events both historical and contemporary.
We're not disputing tone. We're not disputing that conflict and consequences should exist. We're not disputing that spy RP should not exist. Let's bring in some Toz here, and get the context you've skimmed over: You're responding to the initial assertion, but not any of the other points Toz has made. His qualitative assessment relies upon these other caveats - he is asserting, in fact, that the reason spy RP is terrible is because the field is heavily slanted toward the spy, and just as heavily against the people who would, theoretically, want to detect the spy. We're not playing a game that's built for that sort of in-depth espionage, and the mechanical shortcomings are punishingly silly in this respect.
If you can address that in further depth, that'd be great. Thank G-d we agree on something. "Refuse to accept loss" is a strawman of the criticisms here. Again, Toz's critique - as quoted above, from page one - is fundamentally rooted in the skewed playing field. He is observing, correctly, that Enorian was placed into an exceptionally unfair position in which winning was nearly impossible unless the spy - who has no incentive to do so - intentionally screwed up.
I would imagine that both he and I are a little bit mollified by the recent alterations, but nevertheless, this points to something key-
It's not losing we object to.
In fact, this didn't even feel like losing.
Quoting Toz, again: In order for the concepts of winning and losing to make sense, there has to be a reasonable playing field and a reasonable chance for both sides. None of that was present here. It was a skewed playing field, offering every possible advantage to the Syssin - it was such a huge advantage, in fact, that we didn't even realize we were playing an espionage game until Atarah had already won.
It felt like being cheated.
There are times when consequences of this scope are appropriate, but not in this context - not because just one person slipped up. Consequences of this scope should occur when a city's collective effort, over a long period of time, has utterly failed. It shouldn't be a normal case, and one person shouldn't be able to pull it off so easily.
Of course, we agree on that, which brings us to my conclusion.
In light of the previously skewed playing field, and the fact that this is a community of players, there was an obligation for Atarah to use her advantage responsibly, and to perpetuate conflict that was good for the game as a whole, rather than punching down at people she had at her complete mercy. In the context of a game which is meant to be fun, meant to be a relatively fair experience for all involved, Atarah had a responsibility to consider the players she was hurting.
This laissez-faire concept of a game world only goes so far - extended to its logical conclusion, you have the powerful players ganging up on the powerless ones, and that's fine because, hey, you're not responsible for their OOC feelings, and hey, it's not against the rules, is it?
The point I was making in the last thread, and the point I'm making here now, is simply this: we're people. Every single one of us is a human behind a keyboard. We have names. Some of us go to school. Some of us have jobs. Some of us have pets, partners, children. A lot of us are playing this game because we've played it for ages; a lot of other people play it because it's cheap, it doesn't demand a good computer or a good Internet connection, and it hits that creative/social/mechanical spot.
We've all got a part in making sure that we're being as decent to each other as we can, because, after all, we're the main draw of this world. If you have bad players, you have a bad game, and I want my game to be as good as it can be.
So, let's quote you again, just to contextualize this properly: Making that a secondary priority in favor of some sort of abstract "dark fantasy" ideal? You've as good as said that our mechanics don't back that up, and unless major changes are made, there will probably never be a severe enough degree of consequence in an IRE MUD to capture the bleak, uncompromising feel you're after. Maybe try Armageddon? That's a good-faith suggestion, btw.
Me? I just want to log onto my silly, over-the-top MUD with undying, ageless immortals and self-indulgent RP cliques and the occasional bit of conflict. I've played this game for over ten years. I've been through my grimdark phase, my jackass phase, my snuggly phase... and ultimately I guess what I've come around to is that people play this silly game for a million different reasons and it's not for me to tell them why they should be playing it, as long as they're not messing with the way I want to play it.
And ultimately, it's no one's fault that the game isn't what you want it to be. You may - wrongly - not consider yourself responsible to the community you're a part of, but...
I think if you were really carrying this principle - "I, and I suspect Kalak, do not hold this view. I think it is up to other people to moderate their own emotions and if someone is upset IRL by something that my character does that is neither my responsibility nor my problem." - to its logical conclusion? You would recognize that your response here is, fundamentally, emerging from a place of entitlement.
This also explains why you've been arguing against Enorian's overall response to what happened - to you, our complaints, and we ourselves, are barriers between you and the game that you want, that you feel that you deserve.
You are refusing to give our emotions due consideration not because you necessarily feel that we're wrong, but because if you give them any room, any validity, it's admitting that your idealized vision of the game world is less important than the people playing in that game world.
Nobody owes you a particular experience of the game. Take your own bad advice, step back, and moderate your emotions.
Now if I must return back to the topic of "inevitability of theft"....that falsely assumes that the person behind a potential theft will almost always successfully complete his/her task without any barrier. But in between an induction and the theft:
-The player can have a change of heart.
-RP circumstances can lead to an outcome which ends up with the character not committing the crime.
-The spying character can be suspected and his/her scheme can be uncovered.
-Someone metagames about the spying character and prevents the occurrence. (Lame but that can happen)
-The player behind the thieving character can face RL challenges and find no more time to play.
-The suspected character would be directed to the "safer" positions in the city.
-Player with spying motives actually can be open to RP when faced with a well-thought interrogation.
Examples could go on and on. So, unless the person has a perfect ironwill and deep motive to wait it out for ages to commit that act....there are many possibilities which may occur. So it is NOT inevitable. I do not think @Atarah OOCly possesses that kind of malicious patience to screw over you guys inevitably. Personally, I would like to view some Enorianites as inquisitive, interrogating and accomplished witch-hunters who can be ruthless and pragmatic in their actions.
You do not have to treat people who are hopping organizations as second class citizens or members, just you can take additional steps on the side of caution without making them feel as unwelcome. That is my point.
And I'll say this: I do not believe for one moment Spinesreach would've given anything back, had there not been intervention. Be it Xenia, be it Gods, be it some other, good natured player. If the people who had been in charge of this 'espionage' had been the only ones making the choice, they would've kept it, and spent the next years IRL gloating about it to make them feel really cool and tough. And that kind of behavior, that kind of callous disregard for, again, PEOPLE behind KEYBOARDS is a poison. If you want a game full of callous people who don't care about their fellow player, I hope to god you have to find another one. Not because I want anyone run out, but because I will not stick around if that behavior becomes the norm. Not a chance.
Most of the time I can read through people's words on what they intend, but Kalak generally upholds the concept of "Trust once, but once only" So yes, there are times my character got screwed too. But that is because of a design decision rather then I can be manipulated. The words of people generally will betray their intentions. Failure to see indicators...eh...there is nothing can be done about that.
Now my opinion could seem as a harsh one but that is truest to the story of a game. If there was no intervention, Enorian would either have to recover their losses partly via diplomacy/bending the knee or endure the difficulties presented, building a different way of existence. Intervention truly diluted the occurrences and killed all the possible futures for the game.
None of us are callous people because we wish for a game with consequences. A game where one side can end up screwed over and becomes ready to reform their approach to the gameplay.
I don't even have a strong opinion on the actual theft, but your unwillingness to address this is frustrating. Have you considered taking a 24 hour break from the conversation instead of restating your case over and over?
There was no way for Enorian to actually detect this beyond never giving any former Syssin any position that would give them any power at all. And that is not a reasonable expectation.
Yeah, sure, we have ylem to fight over, but ylem isn't a central component to whatever theme each city is central to. Give us a system where we have territory to fight over. Or resources that are actually crucial for functioning. Give us a system where you have multiple avenues you can use to contribute and still have a meaningful impact on the game without having to invest heavily in PK or RP alone. Give us a system where you can jump into conflict and reap big rewards, but not be so screwed over you can't function. A system with checks and cooldowns that would make abuse less likely and be less exasperating to participate in, and doesn't require us to essentially not have a life for x number of days.
To address the ongoing discussion that's been going on about what happened. There's two aspects to this game: the actual rules of the game decided on and enforced by the admins, and the norms or spirit of the game which is largely enforced by players.
Yeah, it's been said that no rules were broken. Fine. It is what it is. And mechanically, no, no rules were broken.
However. What happened really went against the spirit of the game and the norms a majority of players seem to abide by. I think this is pretty apparent by now. A large number of players don't think what was done by a few individuals was okay. Most players here are people that, while we may not like them, try their damnedest to make playing enjoyable for others. Things were done to take advantage of that established norm. It went against the spirit of the game that a large number of players seem to hold.
Yeah, maybe no rules were broken, but let's face it. People are more hurt and disgusted by the spirit of the game being undermined because it takes some serious lack of empathy or regard for others to go against the norms the community has established for itself.
If you know people in this community, you'll have undoubtedly heard things. How many people have quit over this debacle? How many are still considering it? How many have stepped down from leadership or switched sides out of disgust? How many more are dissuaded from simply logging in or have decided to take a break? How many people have decided to just simply not trust certain players because you know now the lengths they'll go to screw you over?
Now. Extrapolate from this and consider other actions in the game. Sure. Someone might not be breaking any rules, but a lot of stuff they do goes against the spirit of the game. Ask the same questions I just asked above, and think. If a large number of players feel certain behaviors are unhealthy and detrimental to the game, but those behaviors are allowed to continue, what do you think that will do to the community if the norms are continually violated?
There are two aspects of this game that have to be looked after in order to keep the game in a good spot: enforcing the rules and taking care of the community. Enforcing rules is somewhat easy since it's rather black and white. Taking care of the community? That's tricky.
But think of it this way. You want the game community to be welcoming, helpful, and supportive? You want people to keep coming back, recommending the game to others? Consider the behaviors that are repeatedly done that might be hurting or going against the spirit of the game. As players? A lot of the time we're able to police ourselves. But I think it night go a long way in knowing that the staff severely discourage certain behaviors too, though in a position where your primary job is to enforce rules? Might not be possible.
So. I dunno. Something to consider.
(And yes. This is probably very hypocritical coming from me, and I recognize that)
It was one of my priorities in other games when I am the lead, that I would try to make the rules spy-tolerant. Hence no such unpleasant stuff happened on my watch while people had a chance to rise through the ranks of the organization itself. One aim is to make people not feel like they are second class members and another aim is that in the case they might be spies, their damage would be contained.
@Xavin I several times stated that people should take their decisions based on IC not OOC. If they take their decisions based on OOC sensibilities and get mislead or burned due to a consequence...that is their OOC responsibility. For IC world it means that you have been acting irrationally and out of context. Now I do not say that people should keep someone off from their city. Just do not hand them vital roles that easily and try to read into their intentions. Hints are not given willingly always, one of the responsibility of leadership is to talk with people and try to find cracks in their logic and words.
@Shachalai People do not have to give you any clues willingly, you have to cut the wheat from chaff. Engage them, observe them and draw a conclusion. I think at this point you try to mask the obvious failure of Enorian players by attributing to the external situations.
You have to pick one in order to remain consistent.
So please stop trying to pick some small pockets in quotes and try to portray me as someone inconsistent. Instead get involved. Pick the details in the way people type, then you shall find your answers.
Regardless of what the Divine did. Regardless of who was online at the time. Regardless of how much of the leadership showed up. The comms were going to be returned.
The only possible difference would have been the manner in which they were returned, and potentially how much of it was returned.
Trust me. I tried delaying it a bit, but people were adamant. It's part of why I love their characters, and they were completely in character while making those decisions.
As for Spy RP? Personally, I think it's more exciting to play the double-agent. I mean, if Satomi randomly joined Enorian, for example, well, she'd probably be more than welcome. If I were going to be a spy, I might poke at admins to maybe set up a thing where the city guards come to Rasani, or maybe one of the Heralds, or their Warden, and have them mention some shady business that Satomi is up to.. like.. leaving letters in dead drops (I'd even write out letters and drop them in discreet places throughout the city). Maybe I'd leave the city at specific times of the IG day looking furtive in front of the guards and such.
You could even go so far as to let Enorian people know, OOC, that you are a spy and hope/trust that they won't abuse that knowledge in a meta-gamey fashion. Not everyone, of course, but the people who are most-likely to be suspicious, and least likely to ruin the RP.
I mean, realistically, spies do a lot of shady-looking things on the regular unless they are in a deep-dive, no communication sort of thing.. and even then they establish networks.. Like asking the guards about their patrol rotations or some nonsense.
Anyway, it comes down to how much you're willing to put yourself out there. Whether you mind losing a little bit, or you just want to win. etc. etc. There are ways to make being a spy valid and interesting, it just depends on how willing you are to potentially get caught and executed before being booted back to Spinesreach with nothing in hand.
Text lacks a clear and consistent means of denoting emphasis, tone, pitch, and micropauses.
Unlike real life behavior, this game is not only missing reliable means of communicating these things, but a character's behavior is subject to more premeditation and deliberation than someone just spontaneously acting in real life. You can control for a lot of factors that you can't in real life.
Writing style, word choice, grammar, emphasis - these are all subjective things, and by nature of the fact that language is an imprecise tool, the same ideas and the same words will communicate very different impressions to different people.
Essentially, you're just asking us to guess, and if we guess wrong, we lose all our commodities.
That's somehow even worse than the contradiction you initially presented.
See also, the Toz post you've consistently failed to engage with:
I agree with your point @Satomi , but from what I'm getting the point people are trying to make is that there was no effort in trying to RP the double-agent, nor any heads-up from the player betraying Enorian that their character was going to betray them. Perhaps something more interesting could have been arranged between both parties that could have resulted in something meaningful.
But from what I'm getting, this character just got up and left suddenly despite providing no hint IC or OOC that such was going to happen. It's trivial for anyone to just side-hop, play nice for a bit and then betray or leave you out of nowhere. It's really on the betrayer (if they're even trying to RP) to drop hints and make the act even remotely interesting.
@Kalak, sure, body language and speech patterns are important indicators of stuff in real life. But that's directly observable. In a medium like text where clues and hints can pretty much be lost based on both the skill of the writer and the comprehension skills of the reader, you can't just rely on 2deep4you hints.