Adventurers Have No User Details

[Bedwyr]

Really? You're not allowed to threaten someone with torture unless they betray their family/realm?

An adventurer?  Sure, a noble would be perfectly fine IC, but threatening an adventurer like that is nuts.

[Vellos]

That's bullcrap, Indirik, and you know it. It's not a question of betraying family or realm: it's a question of the judge assuming the ADVENTURER could supply information about another realm's orders because he is controlled by the same PLAYER as a different NOBLE.

[Bedwyr]

Hyral,

Was the Judge demanding the information in that prison stay?  Or was this a "go get it or I'll arrest you again and do these things to"?

[Indirik]

I was just discussing this with Bedwyr on IRC, and I think that I understood the advy/prison post different than Bedwyr did.

If the judge is saying to the advy "give me the information right this very instant, or I will immediately torture/execute you" then that's bad player behavior. I agree that there's no possible way that someone could expect an advy to have that kind of information on-hand.

But that's not how I read Hyral's post. I read it as "when you get out of jail, go find your family member and get the information form them, then bring it back to me. If you don't, I will find you and have you arrested again, and keep having you arrested until you comply." Is that an empty threat? Pretty much. The advy can just run away. But there's no rule against making empty threats.

Vellos: Hyral said "...It's one thing to figure out that this particular commoner is somehow related that particular noble..." so I am working on the assumption that the judge knows that there's a family connection. So the judge knows that there's a something that could be exploited there. How the judge found out about this connection is a completely separate issue.

[Hyral]

Considering she was tortured until she escaped, and received messages to the effect of "You know, your stay could easily be more pleasant if..." I took it that he wanted the information right then. Earlier in this thread it was said that nobles could eventually, through whatever means (IC use of the family history), find a connection between a noble and an adventurer. I can accept that. But, in my opinion, it's different to actually expect the adventurer to be able to provide detailed military information from their estranged noble relatives whenever someone asks.

Honestly, though, at the time I wasn't sure if it was Abuse with a capital A, or just incredibly poor gameplay (like using a private RP as public info), and went about handling it IC (with limited advy-style success). The issue seems just as iffy now, but it still really, really bothers me.

[Indirik]

Considering she was tortured until she escaped, and received messages to the effect of "You know, your stay could easily be more pleasant if..." I took it that he wanted the information right then.

I would consider expecting the advy to have the info on-hand to be very poor playing. At that point, they are expecting the player to break separation of characters.

[Jeckyl]

Really? You're not allowed to threaten someone with torture unless they betray their family/realm?

'If you don't give me the orders/reports from your noble sister's realm

As in, the messages from the other character.

[Indirik]

As in, the messages from the other character.

Yes, I understand that. The judge is asking one character to betray the other. So what? Yes, it would probably be awkward to RP both sides of a true betrayal. (I've seen some truly horrible RPs of that kind of thing.) But merely asking that is not in any way against the rules.

Hyral's clarification of the specifics of how it was done are the problem.

[Vellos]

Yes, I understand that. The judge is asking one character to betray the other.

No, the judge is asking the player to CHEAT, and pass messages between characters without actually sending a message.

If it can't be gotten in a scout report or tortured out of a character, then the character doesn't know it. If a judge has already tortured an adventurer for info and gotten nothing, they can have a good guess the advy has no info. The only purpose of further inquiry is either some fun RP harassment, which is totally legit, or else trying to press for information from a different character, which is capital-A Abuse.

I happen to know it is abuse because, when I first started doing spy stuff in EC those many long years ago, one of my spies was another character's family member, and he passed the info that way, rather than messages. I was new, and so didn't realize this was cheating, and eventually got a Titan warning.

[Indirik]

No, the judge is asking the player to CHEAT, and pass messages between characters without actually sending a message.

As I explained earlier, that is not how I read Hyral's message. I interpreted the situation as "Go get the info" not "give it to me this instant".

[songqu88@gmail.com]

On the original topic, sort of...It would make sense to have the family of th adventurer available, if only so that it can be determined finally just which family thinks that adventurer is a bastard, and thus from which family he/she was cast out.

[Ramiel]

On the original topic, sort of...It would make sense to have the family of th adventurer available, if only so that it can be determined finally just which family thinks that adventurer is a bastard, and thus from which family he/she was cast out.

Depends.

On one said it will let very bad playing occur and can break immersion. If I was thrown out of a noble family, wouldnt they take steps to ensure no one could trace me back to them? Or if I left the noble family in bad grace, surely I wouldnt advertise my lineage freely, might be hunters after me!

On the other, its User Details, Not Family Details. So unless Advies get a seperete user page that just displays OOC Information (nothing that lists their toons/family name/links to family wiki) then its going to be a case of Playing the game and respecting Roleplay, or not.

[songqu88@gmail.com]

There's also the fact that you kind of still need a family name to become a noble. So unless you want every adventurer to spend the rest of his/her life as a commoner, then sooner or later the family name will have to be mentioned.

Maybe not everyone does this, as the mechanics just says H/P, 3 recs, have the gold, be in realm, good to go. But if you think about it, it should be obvious that any ennobled adventurer should have his family name acquired to become a noble. One does not see a knight with no family name running around. But, we are also restricted to one family, so there is no claiming other family names upon ennoblement.

[Vellos]

Well of course the family name is added upon ennoblement. But I don't see why it should be viewable in advance of that.

Though, allowing recommenders to see family information would be cool. Adventurers would remain anonymous except to those that recommend them, and so presumably have done some research. Unsure how difficult that would be to code.