The Zuma

[songqu88@gmail.com]

More like the Zuma want nothing to do with human affairs. That does not mean they isolate themselves, but I've already gone over the justification for that before. And when it comes down to it, basically, it's up to the GM to decide how and when the Zuma would play any sort of significant role, if any, on Dwilight. Before that, I guess there would at most be a few glimpses. I've tried to do some things with the wiki, but it seems like no one really cared so I stopped updating it after a few months. In-game, well, it's not as if organizing these things is easy since most of the time I'm doing it separately from the GM. I'm doing something small-scale for some adventurers right now, if you're curious, which should make it clear who my target audience is.

[De-Legro]

How exactly is asking for one line of semi-explanation in an RP wanting everything on a silver platter?

If I wanted everything on a silver platter I'd be demanding the entirety of Zuma lore and detailed background info for every daimon. Don't over exaggerate and don't adopt such a patronising tone.

Because you WANT a explanation. You want the answer handed to you when the intent would appear to be to make us think about all possible answers and make the IG effort to try and establish the truth. To me its like saying at the beginning of the invasions that we as "players" want to know the general path of the invasion so that we are not as confused as our characters.

[Igelfeld]

If you want to learn about the Zuma join Cordatus Bestiarium, it is essentially a religion based on learning from and about the Zuma. (Don't worry though, we will keep their greatest secrets within the religion).

[Chenier]

Well yeah, if they are deliberately meant to be all mysterious then sure. But if that's the case then why the hell did they originally interact so much with humans and spend a lot of time engaging in RP with pretty much anyone who tried to speak to them? People went there and found out a LOT about their culture and customs. Now, if they suddenly have a change of heart then sure, that's reasonable.

But if so then a simple one line in an RP when they attacked D'Hara would have sufficed. For example: "We no longer permit inferior beings to question us."

Or if they were always capricious and inconsistent then "It is not for inferior beings to question the motivations of the Zuma."

Because at the moment that's what the root cause of all the griping is. Inconsistency. If these are going to be capricious, inconstant creatures then fine - just let us know. If they're going to be the big bogeyman then fine as well. If they're going to be friendly and peaceful then fine as well. But they should either be consistent or we should be tossed a single, solitary bone to let us know that they're inconsistent and can change their minds at the drop of a pin. Either option would be interesting for the game as long as we have even a faint clue as to what is going on.

At least on Beluaterra we had a rough idea what to expect - slaughter and disaster but at least it's consistent.

The Zuma on the other hand, currently seem to be in a permanent state of schizophrenia.

What was probably done in order to create a feeling of "mystery" ended up creating a feeling of nothing but lameness. I was the ambassador who dined with Vates in their halls, and hosted their ambassador Custos in ours. The latter wasn't as warm as the former, but not cold either. What was the lamest was that we could never get any answers. When we followed them back to their homelands, we never got a response. They acted as if there was nobody there. In one RP, they have a full city with a flowering civilization (albeit somewhat primitive), and in the next, nobody's there. That's lame. I also wouldn't have expected to get all my answers if mystery is what they wanted, but ignoring outright just gave out the wrong message.

The message sent wasn't "we must be careful when dealing with them, they are unpredictable", but rather "it's not even worth dealing with them, they can't ever be arsed to give any form of reply except when they already feel like it, even if only in RP and not as IC interactions".

Because you WANT a explanation. You want the answer handed to you when the intent would appear to be to make us think about all possible answers and make the IG effort to try and establish the truth. To me its like saying at the beginning of the invasions that we as "players" want to know the general path of the invasion so that we are not as confused as our characters.

No. Sucks to not know why they did it, but that's not what was asked. What was asked was that if they come all the way down to loot us, that they at least bother to react to us. And that they entertain us with some RPs when we arrived in their capital, regardless of the answers granted (or not). Not that they simply go AFK and that we be denied any RP opportunity.

I honestly don't really care why they did it anymore. I just find that the way they did it really sucked.

[ó Broin]

And if there continued unwilliness to respond is part of a greater plan? Say a plan to enrage our characters and force some sort of conflict that WE initiate with them for a change?

[Chenier]

And if there continued unwilliness to respond is part of a greater plan? Say a plan to enrage our characters and force some sort of conflict that WE initiate with them for a change?

That'd just be dumb. Our characters won't attack the Zuma because of how mind-numbing the mere thought of it is, considering how overwhelmingly strong they are.

And the frustration is more OOC than IC.

[De-Legro]

That'd just be dumb. Our characters won't attack the Zuma because of how mind-numbing the mere thought of it is, considering how overwhelmingly strong they are.

And the frustration is more OOC than IC.

Really? If someone snubbed my noble I would certainly consider teaching them the proper respect due my station.

[Chenier]

Really? If someone snubbed my noble I would certainly consider teaching them the proper respect due my station.

Except it isn't "someone". It's "something". And a "something" that clearly cannot be defeated. One can easily be both too proud and too pragmatic to engage in a battle he knows he will lose.

[De-Legro]

Except it isn't "someone". It's "something". And a "something" that clearly cannot be defeated. One can easily be both too proud and too pragmatic to engage in a battle he knows he will lose.

Good thing they don't snub only 1 character then. Perhaps they will happen upon a character that either has the balls, or lacks the brain to engage in conflict.

[Geronus]

What's the point of a good story if nobody ever gets to read it?

[^ban^]

What's the point of a good story if nobody ever gets to read it?

The characters in a story rarely know everything.

[Chenier]

The characters in a story rarely know everything.

But the reader expects to have a clue on what's going on in the novel. Intrigue in books isn't created by just leaving a whole bunch of pages blank, but by encouraging the reader to ask himself a series of questions.

[De-Legro]

But the reader expects to have a clue on what's going on in the novel. Intrigue in books isn't created by just leaving a whole bunch of pages blank, but by encouraging the reader to ask himself a series of questions.

No one said the answers wouldn't be revealed at some stage though. It might simply be that the story will be revealed at a later date, who knows.

[Chenier]

No one said the answers wouldn't be revealed at some stage though. It might simply be that the story will be revealed at a later date, who knows.

A reader expects to have hints along the way, and wouldn't read a thousand pages of filler text just to finally get an idea of what's going on at the end.

Just saying, for those who insist on comparing with novels.

[Bedwyr]

Honestly, I'm with Dominic on this.  If they're not going to interact, that's one thing.  If they're going to interact, then they need to interact.