BattleMaster > Dwilight
Zuma/Daimons
Anaris:
--- Quote from: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 07:54:56 PM ---It's not even ultimately about playing one against another. It's about the distinction between "Very loyal realm" and "Multi-accounts." Doesn't bother me if I can't play someone against someone else because they're just very loyal. It does bother me when the reason I can't do it is because I'm dealing with multis or clans. No, GMs are not the same, but the frustrations are similar in their nature.
--- End quote ---
But—and I believe I've mentioned this before—if Tom wanted you to be able to make any headway by playing the Zuma against each other, you would already be able to do it. Adding more GMs will not change the cohesiveness of the Zuma as a group. The cohesiveness of their movement times and response times, sure. But not the cohesiveness of the bonds between them.
If there is not meant to be a way to play one Zuma against another, they simply will not let you. No matter how many or how few they are.
Do you just not believe me in this, or are you truly not grasping the concept?
vonGenf:
--- Quote from: Anaris on February 08, 2012, 08:04:37 PM ---Do you just not believe me in this, or are you truly not grasping the concept?
--- End quote ---
He's saying he thinks that concept makes the game less fun.
Indirik:
--- Quote ---He's saying he thinks that concept makes the game less fun.
--- End quote ---
Nevertheless, that's the way it is. If you want that to change, you will need to convince Tom and/or the ZumaGM. Adding more GMs without changing the underlying concept of the NPC realm will not accomplish that goal.
NPC realms are not intended to be just like regular player-run realms. If they were, then they wouldn't be there at all.
vonGenf:
--- Quote from: Indirik on February 08, 2012, 08:19:13 PM ---Nevertheless, that's the way it is. If you want that to change, you will need to convince Tom and/or the ZumaGM. Adding more GMs without changing the underlying concept of the NPC realm will not accomplish that goal.
--- End quote ---
ZumaGM reads this forum, does he not?
I'm not myself convinced that multiple GMs is a great idea and I tend to agree with you that adding GM without changing the underlying concept will not change much. I'm not yet sure how to change the underlying concept to make it better. If I get an idea, I'll post it.
What I don't do is ask people to refrain from arguing their case on the grounds that I'm not the one that has to be convinced, and that anyway things are the way things are.
I get that you're not the one who will take the decision to change things. That's cool, I'm not that person either. Let Vellos argue away. You don't have to agree with what he says, but you don't have to disagree with him saying it.
Vellos:
--- Quote from: Anaris on February 08, 2012, 08:04:37 PM ---Adding more GMs will not change the cohesiveness of the Zuma as a group. The cohesiveness of their movement times and response times, sure. But not the cohesiveness of the bonds between them.
--- End quote ---
And there, I disagree.
I think (and the Zuma GM can correct me on this if I'm wrong) that the Zuma GM does not speak daimon. Nor does he send roleplays to himself saying, "Two Zuma approach you, saying..." The Zuma GM instantly knows everything any daimon knows. And the daimons ICly seem to know everything anything of them known ICly. Maybe the Zuma GM is sending messages between his/her characters. Also, the daimons have repeatedly stated that my character, Hireshmont, was intentionally trying to insult the Zuma: a thing not stated or implied anywhere IC. And yet all daimons seem to have the identical opinion.
I'm fine if the Zuma are unified and loyal to each other, especially in regards to foreigners. It bothers me that the OOC interactions of one player can be so influential on supposedly separate characters, that knowledge is so perfectly shared, that there are no different daimon perspectives. If multiple GMs want to agree to smash Terran, awesome. But I'd really like for it to be possible for different daimons to have different opinions when they go have their internal daimon pow-wow.
Do you see what I'm saying? If they still end up unified, fine. But I don't see what the game gains by having all daimons be cognitively identical; sure, there are contrived differences between them, but those, thus far, appear to be almost entirely cosmetic differences.
Also, with multiple GMs, they can OOC hold each other accountable more easily for GMing decisions.
--- Quote from: Anaris on February 08, 2012, 08:04:37 PM ---If there is not meant to be a way to play one Zuma against another, they simply will not let you. No matter how many or how few they are.
Do you just not believe me in this, or are you truly not grasping the concept?
--- End quote ---
I think maybe you are so fixed on the idea that "Zuma vs. Zuma" battles should not occur that you're not considering intermediary positions between "All daimons must always be in perfect harmony on all things" and "Daimons should be splintered into divisive, hostile factions." I'm not advocating either thing. I'm suggesting that more real diversity in GMing would be beneficial for both GMs and players.
And arguing with Tom or the Zuma GM does not seem likely to be fruitful for me. The reason is not that I think either is unreasonable, but because of:
--- Quote from: Indirik on February 08, 2012, 08:19:13 PM ---Adding more GMs without changing the underlying concept of the NPC realm will not accomplish that goal.
NPC realms are not intended to be just like regular player-run realms.
--- End quote ---
I do not know, from a design perspective, what the Zuma were intended to be like. I do not know what the underlying concept of the Zuma actually is. And given that I think Tom and the Zuma GM are justifiably leery about sharing those kinds of things that should and could be discovered ICly in an OOC setting like this, it makes discussions of how to make appropriate changes difficult.
Example: Suppose (and I'm just making this up entirely) one of the underlying RPs that I haven't discovered yet is that the daimons in Dwilight are ostracized from the Netherworld somehow. If I then propose, "What if the RP for the rotation was daimons going back to the Netherworld to tend to their holdings and vassals there?" My proposal is obviously untenable. But Tom and the Zuma GM are completely justified in refusing to tell me why it's wrong. And until I know what the current setup actually is, it is very difficult to propose the specifics of a change.
In sum, I am offering a broad outline for what I think, and what I have argued quite a bit, would be a reasonable change to how the Zuma currently are, and one which would, in part or in whole, address many (not all) of the legitimate complaints of many players. From my perspective, this change would not fundamentally alter any of what my character knows about the Zuma ICly. That may not be the case for other characters. OOCly, I get that Tom and the Zuma GM might not like the idea. If possible, I would like to hear their reasons why. I understand if they cannot give me reasons because it will spoil RP. That would be extremely frustrating to me personally (and I suspect to many players), but I would understand it. But, insofar as the issue can be discussed without exposing IC things, I think it should be.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version