Messages and Metagaming

[Vellos]

Didn't say they were, but at least the impression I have is that that was the point where people started to turn against each other in PoZ, and it gradually degenerated from there.

No, people were looking for excuses long before then: because PoZ was boring as hell and desperately needed SOMETHING to spice it up.

[Perth]

Well that's not true. If you're smart, and have a little bit of luck, they'll never even suspect it was you. Hell, I stabbed someone once and the guy who got blamed for it wasn't even in the region when it happened. I laughed all the way to the bank with the 1,000 gold bounty.

Okay. The great majority of the time then.

Furthermore, it's not like Vellos is even picking battles that make any sense. Frankly, when Galen auto da fe-ed Sigrún, it would have been hard for him to make more of a hash of it if he'd tried. The evil-overlord-ish message preceding the auto da fe, and the barrage of confused, contradictory attempts to disclaim responsibility afterwards, are so far from the kind of mastermind you're advocating for it's really not even amusing.

I wasn't talking about Galen's incident. But since you brought it up, I don't disagree with you on it. No, it wasn't some awesome plan that I thought up for days on end leading up to it. Nor have I been advocating that people have to be "mastermind planeners" in order to have fun in this game. You are. It was, and I believe I stated this on the forums when it happened, a random "hey, I'm really bored with Galen, with this religion, and with PoZ in general lets do something crazy and see what happens." And so had Galen auto-de-fa'ed someone and then try to defend his actions.

From where I sit, that episode with Galen was the first wedge that started the division in Zonasa that led to half the realm hating the other half and wishing they were fighting on the side of the war that actively betrayed and attacked our realm.

Really? Didn't know that. Then from where I sit my actions with Galen may have achieved more than just finding a way for me to rid myself of the character. They actually caused in game conflict. That's a good thing, especially for Zonasa because it was an extremely boring realm. Why does that upset you?




But this whole Galen example is a tangent and not at all the point I was trying to make by popping into this thread. My point was simply the point that you made. I love plausible deniability in this game. What I was trying to say is that there should be more of it and especially in the case of the infiltrator class. What I hate about the infiltrator class is there is virtually no plausible deniability.

[Geronus]

But this whole Galen example is a tangent and not at all the point I was trying to make by popping into this thread. My point was simply the point that you made. I love plausible deniability in this game. What I was trying to say is that there should be more of it and especially in the case of the infiltrator class. What I hate about the infiltrator class is there is virtually no plausible deniability.

There's plenty, if you're smart, patient and careful. Unless your character is either captured or specifically identified leaving the scene of a successful action, there are ways to create uncertainty about who's responsible even with everyone's knowledge of game mechanics.

When I was briefly an infiltrator, I had a unit and traveled around with our realm's army and did things while there was a whole army in the region with me. How do you tell which troop leader is actually secretly an infiltrator? Another thing I used to do was follow well-known infiltrators around. Everyone was always inclined to blame them for any shenanigans I might undertake. Just making sure there are multiple people of any sort in the same region as you are when you undertake infiltrator actions is a pretty good way to generate plausible deniability, especially if the fact that you're an infiltrator is not well known.

[Anaris]

All of which is exactly the sort of thing I mean when you need to stop thinking of infiltrators as ninjas.

To me, it seems like you and Vellos aren't asking for more plausible deniability: you're asking for implausible deniability.

[Vellos]

All of which is exactly the sort of thing I mean when you need to stop thinking of infiltrators as ninjas.

Right now, as it stands, infiltrators are ninjas. I'd love for that to change but, as of now, they're ninja-nobles.

To me, it seems like you and Vellos aren't asking for more plausible deniability: you're asking for implausible deniability.

No, I'm arguing for ambiguity. For the same reasons players can't just go look up the battle code, for example, or fame points. Players should have a good idea of how they can protect their character and investments, because the game isn't fun if you can randomly just lose everything.

But players absolutely should not have a perfect knowledge of what is possible. IMHO, metagaming isn't a yes/no proposition: some things are more meta-gamish than others. And the very definition of meta-gaming is stepping outside the game; taking knowledge you know from beyond the game parameters (i.e. you know that peasants CAN'T attack nobles, which your character doesn't know) and applying it to the game.

As I see it, you're arguing that our characters live in a world where the game mechanics are their fundamental reality: that nobody had religions until religion was implemented, nobody ate food until food was implemented, the planet had no seasons until seasons were implemented, the manner in which food is consumed has been revolutionized several times, etc. You're making an argument which, to me, is as fallacious as the old High Tech Battlemaster joke page.

The mechanics are best-attempt proxies for the world our characters live in. And sometimes, the mechanics are insufficient guides, or incoherent guides, or contradictory guides, or even broken guides in the case of bugs. And when those things happen, you find a way to fix it with RP. And where the game, players, or some mixture of those two becomes complicated, confusing, "nefarious," the leeway for RP can, does, and should expand.

You don't really think every infiltrator always assassinates at night, in bed, with a poisoned dagger, do you?

[Dante Silverfire]

(i.e. you know that peasants CAN'T attack nobles, which your character doesn't know) and applying it to the game.

This really does irk me. My character DOES know that.

How can a single peasant, without any training, experience, or knowledge of how a military camp is set up, infiltrate a well-guarded military encampment, sneak by multiple guards, including ones specifically stationed to protect high value targets like say a council member, not only do that, but then stab a noble OR have the skill to fight the noble in hand-to-hand combat, without any training, and then sneak out of the camp without getting discovered.

Not only is not remotely conceivable that a peasant could ever succeed in such an attempt, but it is inconceivable that a peasant would ever even think of attempting such a deed. It would be guaranteed death for the peasant. It is quite historical that while peasants were disposable, nobles were not, and often held for ransom and such, instead of simply killed off hand.

If anyone in-game tells me a peasant could have carried out an assassination attempt my character will consider them clinically insane. (As this has happened, my character does think this)

[Stabbity]

The mechanics are best-attempt proxies for the world our characters live in. And sometimes, the mechanics are insufficient guides, or incoherent guides, or contradictory guides, or even broken guides in the case of bugs. And when those things happen, you find a way to fix it with RP. And where the game, players, or some mixture of those two becomes complicated, confusing, "nefarious," the leeway for RP can, does, and should expand.

You don't really think every infiltrator always assassinates at night, in bed, with a poisoned dagger, do you?

Only the ones who get caught. But every single infiltrator ever captured in the attempt was caught with a poisoned dagger under his cloak.

[Anaris]

Right now, as it stands, infiltrators are ninjas. I'd love for that to change but, as of now, they're ninja-nobles.

No, they're not. If they could be invisible, you'd have a case, but they can't.

No, I'm arguing for ambiguity.

You're arguing for unnecessary ambiguity, from unreasonable quarters.

As I see it, you're arguing that our characters live in a world where the game mechanics are their fundamental reality: that nobody had religions until religion was implemented, nobody ate food until food was implemented, the planet had no seasons until seasons were implemented, the manner in which food is consumed has been revolutionized several times, etc. You're making an argument which, to me, is as fallacious as the old High Tech Battlemaster joke page.

Except that the High Tech Game has so many holes in it, it's obviously just a joke.

Furthermore, I'm not arguing all that. I'm arguing that there was no uniform formal structure to religion, or any ability to use religion to influence the peasantry before religion was implemented. I'm arguing that nobody starved before food was implemented. I'm arguing that on the continents that still don't have seasons active (which is most of them), there's no regular variation in how much food is harvested per day throughout the year.

The mechanics are best-attempt proxies for the world our characters live in. And sometimes, the mechanics are insufficient guides, or incoherent guides, or contradictory guides, or even broken guides in the case of bugs. And when those things happen, you find a way to fix it with RP. And where the game, players, or some mixture of those two becomes complicated, confusing, "nefarious," the leeway for RP can, does, and should expand.

That doesn't mean you get to force everyone else to accept your character's word over a game-mechanic report.
That doesn't mean you get to force everyone else to believe that even though everyone knows perfectly well who attacked Duke Kepler, not only should our characters not know this, they shouldn't even suspect it, because look! there's an alternate hypothesis that plays into the notion that peasants always lie and nobles always tell the truth!!!

I'm sorry, Vellos, but again, if you had picked situations in which to attempt to advance this philosophy that could conceivably be said to provide engaging conflict or good RP, I'd be much more inclined to agree that you have some sort of a point. As it is, your "appeal to RP" rings hollow. Oradrikkon was not only asking our characters to believe utterly ludicrous things, he was asking that we completely dismiss the obvious answer. And I think much less of Morgan for entertaining the notion for longer than 5 seconds.

[Vellos]

I'm sorry, Vellos, but again, if you had picked situations in which to attempt to advance this philosophy that could conceivably be said to provide engaging conflict or good RP, I'd be much more inclined to agree that you have some sort of a point. As it is, your "appeal to RP" rings hollow. Oradrikkon was not only asking our characters to believe utterly ludicrous things, he was asking that we completely dismiss the obvious answer. And I think much less of Morgan for entertaining the notion for longer than 5 seconds.

I think you're misremembering the situation, so I'll stop arguing.

[Blue Star]

Just a side note* Not all peasants/commoners are untrained/unskilled.

(Proof) Adventurers and they walk through lands invisible for the most part. Can't adventurers duel nobles?

Bandits/robber/cutthorats hold nobles for ransom even other nobles.

[Vita`]

They are untrained/unskilled in infiltrating a well-armed camp. Bandits/robbers only strike nobles with no units or very few men. Adventurers don't attack monster/undead hordes (the equivalent of a strong unit), only when they're smaller sized (though the text does refer to attacking undead armies, which isn't entirely sensible either).

[Stabbity]

And comparing a duel to an infiltrator action is laughable.

Besides, (don't tell anyone IC) advies are technically bastard nobility anyway. Otherwise they'd lop their own limbs off with those swords.

[Indirik]

Adventurers are not invisible, in any way. Their presence in a region is plainly declared for anyone who cares to look. The fact that few people look is irrelevant.

And no, advys cannot duel nobles.

[Vita`]

Indirik: I'm pretty sure advies are invisible on regiondetails.php to nobles (other advies can see other advies), but not 'send message to all in region' or the arrest adventurer list.

[Blue Star]

Yes, I was refering to you have to message all in region or have the arrest adventure come up.