BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => BM General Discussion => Topic started by: Nathan on October 17, 2011, 03:21:51 PM
-
So, is it?
I'm thinking of situations like a realm becoming silent and boring. Is it acceptable then to say "okay, things are getting boring, what would spice up the realm?". Not saying "let's all hate X realm", but instead asking for ideas on how to take a realm forward and make it more exciting for everyone.
I'm thinking more from the point of view of those in power, as it's the Council's job (and more so the ruler's job) to act as a sort of guiding hand to make sure everything in a realm is still fun for the other players.
-
Well, it's a bit of a grey area. If you plan stuff OOC with a small clique, excluding 90% of the realm, nothing is ever discussed IC and it only comes to light when the proper buttons are pushed, then that's wrong. If an OOC idea is sent to a wide audience, and it results in IC interaction and events, then I would say that is fine.
-
Well, you first have to decide on what constitutes OOC planning. Take, for instance, the recent Magistrates case. While accusing Toupellon of being formed completely through OOC planning, the following OOC message was sent by one of the Arcachonians:
"I suggest we immediately join in alliance with arcea and carve up this power played realm. This behaviour is dispicable beyond belief."
When someone pointed out that this would be the same OOC behaviour they were complaining about, their response was:
Nah I'm not suggesting ans ooc alliance, but a game based alliance against a common threat. We ought to try to see if the arceans see this unnatural state as a threat or they are happy to go along with it. We can definitely play it in character.
Proposing in an OOC message that your realm goes from war with Arcaea to allied with Arcaea and joins them in attacking someone else isn't OOC planning? Or is it not OOC planning so long as all of your carefully-prepared OOC script is copy/pasted into IG messages?
So, what do you define as OOC planning? And where do you think it crosses the line?
-
So, is it?
I'm thinking of situations like a realm becoming silent and boring. Is it acceptable then to say "okay, things are getting boring, what would spice up the realm?". Not saying "let's all hate X realm", but instead asking for ideas on how to take a realm forward and make it more exciting for everyone.
I'm thinking more from the point of view of those in power, as it's the Council's job (and more so the ruler's job) to act as a sort of guiding hand to make sure everything in a realm is still fun for the other players.
can you think about it a little more, and than explain why would you want to plan things ooc, instead of ic? what would be the reason?
having complete boredem in realm should be perfect ic reason to do something, with arguments like realm is in stagnation, nobles are ignored etc. etc.
in reality, however, it often turns out that you cannot get almost anyone to even respond you to a simple letter, except those who are already in power who would, at best, send some polite short answers.
and that is about it, after such an exploration, the only thing you can do is to move elsewhere - to find out that you came into the same problems... :-[
-
I personally think that some OOC discussion between some people is acceptable. It can be useful to prepare things that you want to do a little bit more in-depth before actually starting the implementation. it can also be useful to know if the intended "target" is willing at all to go along in certain RPs. IRC can be the perfect place for that, or personal OOC messages.
When the OOC preparation is done between all characters of a realm (or subset, or guild, or whatever), it becomes a bit of a problem because it crosses the line between playing your character and playing your realm. It is fine to want a realm to advance as a whole and become more fun, but you can't meta-game a character "for the good of the realm".
I think I would draw the line at this point: you should never ask another player to "sign off" on an idea you have OOCly. Nobody has to. Things should grow organically from IC interaction.
-
Pragmatically speaking, I would be insane to make all OOC planning illegal - how would I even enforce that? It would only make people be secretive about it.
The main problem with OOC planning is exclusion. If you chat in school with your friends, people who aren't in your school can't participate. If you make your discussion open to other players, e.g. by letting them know what you discussed at school, I'm totally fine with people using other channels as well.
-
Once upon a time, the realm of Arcaea had three regions, was locked into an alliance that prevented it from doing anything, and was basically dead. Then after some OOC discussions with the whole realm where everyone voted, Queen Trinity declared that it would become a mercenary realm and took Arcaea's first contract helping Arcachon fight Sartania.
And the Far East was never the same!
Generally, exclusion is the only real problem with OOC discussions. If the whole realm (or religion, or whatever) is involved, then I don't see anything particularly wrong with it.
-
Even when everyone is inlcuded, there can be a bullying side to a OOC "consensus" that I don't like.
I'm guessing there were some people whose characters did not agree with making Arcaea a mercenary realm. When the ruler sends a OOC message saying "I do this for the good of the realm, please go along", don't you think it may stifle legitimate IC feelings?
-
Many times IC is also exclusionary, when small councils/groups decide things between themselves, only messaging each other. Is it wrong that such essentially private conversations take place in IRC, for example, instead of ingame, for the sake of efficiency, as long as it is RPed ingame later?
-
Even when everyone is inlcuded, there can be a bullying side to a OOC "consensus" that I don't like.
I'm guessing there were some people whose characters did not agree with making Arcaea a mercenary realm. When the ruler sends a OOC message saying "I do this for the good of the realm, please go along", don't you think it may stifle legitimate IC feelings?
If I remember the story correctly (that was before my time) an OOC discussion was started on what to do to spice things up, a couple of suggestions were made, a vote held, and everyone voted for mercenary.
As for the bullying aspect...I don't really see it. Ruler gets to run the realm, but the player of the Ruler doesn't have any more right to control the realm OOC (leaving aside specific matters of OOC bans and atmosphere) than any other player does.
-
If I remember the story correctly (that was before my time) an OOC discussion was started on what to do to spice things up, a couple of suggestions were made, a vote held, and everyone voted for mercenary.
You mean the vote was held IC? In that case it's not really wrong; although I think it still deprived the realm of possible IC interaction. It's not ideal, but it's acceptable.
If the vote was held OOC, then I strongly disagree with the method. It stifles legitimate play.
-
You mean the vote was held IC? In that case it's not really wrong; although I think it still deprived the realm of possible IC interaction. It's not ideal, but it's acceptable.
If the vote was held OOC, then I strongly disagree with the method. It stifles legitimate play.
Honestly, I'm not sure. I have the story second-hand at best from people who were a little hazy on their memories.
-
again the same question - what was the exact reason such voting in Arcarea was prepared by ooc discussion? what was purpose of it? if realm was bored ,couldn't ruler just say "we are nobles who want to fight, not to sit in boredom all the time"?
what less would he have than, compared to ooc saying the same?
-
Pragmatically speaking, I would be insane to make all OOC planning illegal - how would I even enforce that? It would only make people be secretive about it.
The main problem with OOC planning is exclusion. If you chat in school with your friends, people who aren't in your school can't participate. If you make your discussion open to other players, e.g. by letting them know what you discussed at school, I'm totally fine with people using other channels as well.
exclusion which i see in game mostly come from idea to exclude any possible conflict - aiming to change something in game, political change or similar, but at the same time avoiding clash of ic characters by making some "fair" player to player agreements "in name of higher goals" "because all guys agreed that is best for us" etc. etc. - all that just to ensure desired outcome in advance, instead of playing your character and accepting that outcome will be somewhat unpredictable.
such an approach is more subtle than blatant ooc clan attacks, and it is also more detrimental to any fun, though none of these approaches is frowned upon at all.
such effort to create complex bindings and complex realm hierarchy, different title powers and responsibilities - all that to have monolithic monster-realms in which nothing ever happens. :-[
-
I always try and handle it IC and go OOC only when I feel someone is acting completely unmedieval.
And I mean completely. When it's only a slight tinge of modernism I still try and handle it IC with good old noble bigotry and arrogance.
-
I dunno, I'm a big OOC fan when it comes to changing flavours. Like it or not people join realms to tell certain types of stories and while there might be all the IC reasons in the world to do certain things, it might not be fair to everyone else.
Or if a character needs to be changed because they don't "work" (we all know that we have great concepts that don't pan out), getting some OOC feedback can really help. Oddly I find that realms with more OOC chatter tend to get along much better because you remember that there are people on the other side of the characters and that really, this is about fun.
-
I always try and handle it IC and go OOC only when I feel someone is acting completely unmedieval.
And I mean completely. When it's only a slight tinge of modernism I still try and handle it IC with good old noble bigotry and arrogance.
So your fully written legislation doesn't hint towards modernism? :)
-
So your fully written legislation doesn't hint towards modernism? :)
It doesn't count when the legislation is trying to repel modernism 8)
-
It doesn't count when the legislation is trying to repel modernism 8)
... :P
-
It doesn't count when the legislation is trying to repel modernism 8)
"Please sign my internet petition against the spread of technology"
-
Honestly, I'm not sure. I have the story second-hand at best from people who were a little hazy on their memories.
Well, for the sake of discussion, would you agree that an OOC vote would have been wrong?
In real life, I feel bound by the result of a vote. By the mere fact of participating, I basically agree that I will go by whatever the result is. If I think that there is one outcome I would heavily disagree with, then I don't want a vote to be held at all.
By holding a OOC vote in a realm, you are basically saying "Here's an addendum to the social contract. When you specifically play in that realm, you must play your character in that fashion. If you don't like it, leave the realm. No IC opposition will be tolerated because we've decided to do this OOC for the good of the realm."
And that's wrong.
-
Is that any different than when an IC clique does the same thing?
-
Well, for the sake of discussion, would you agree that an OOC vote would have been wrong?
...No? Point was to find out what the players in that realm wanted to do to shake things up. IC disagreements about it were part of the fun (and indeed the mercenary phase did not last past the next Ruler, who reversed the decision, and was elected at least in part because he was going to do that).
-
By holding a OOC vote in a realm, you are basically saying "Here's an addendum to the social contract. When you specifically play in that realm, you must play your character in that fashion. If you don't like it, leave the realm. No IC opposition will be tolerated because we've decided to do this OOC for the good of the realm."
And that's wrong.
That depends.
You can not modify or overrule the Social Contract or parts of it. And you can not exclude people, so saying "you have to be X in order to play in this realm" is wrong. However, setting a tone for a realm, giving it some atmosphere, culture, etc. is great. And in part that almost has to be done OOC because culture is a complicated thing that is very hard to bring across in a limited game environment. Your character would've grown up that way and consider it normal, but the only way to make you feel like that is by telling you OOC.
And in most cases, people going against the realm culture "IC" are not really playing that much IC. Going against your culture is not something you decide upon on a lazy afternoon, it's a major, life-changing event.
Also, if the culture is extensively developed, there is such a thing as respect for the other players' time and effort.
If, however, the thing you need to do or be is something OOC, like being on the forum, or in a specific IRC channel, or of a certain nationality or whatever, now that's certainly something I wouldn't welcome.
-
Is that any different than when an IC clique does the same thing?
Yes; forming and holding together your IC clique is playing the game.
-
You can not modify or overrule the Social Contract or parts of it. And you can not exclude people, so saying "you have to be X in order to play in this realm" is wrong. However, setting a tone for a realm, giving it some atmosphere, culture, etc. is great. And in part that almost has to be done OOC because culture is a complicated thing that is very hard to bring across in a limited game environment. Your character would've grown up that way and consider it normal, but the only way to make you feel like that is by telling you OOC.
I can agree with you for established culture. This can be written, for example, on the wiki; a new player who acts contrary to some historical events should be told to go inform themselves about the realm and come back.
However, setting up a culture from scratch should be done IC.
I always disagreed, for example, with people who start a realm through colony or secession and then decide "This is going to be a Viking/Samurai/whatever realm". It is fine to play your character that way; it is fine to play your ruler that way and favor other characters who go along with it; but I don't think it's fine to say OOC "This is the way "we" want this realm set up and if you don't like it you should go away".
And in most cases, people going against the realm culture "IC" are not really playing that much IC. Going against your culture is not something you decide upon on a lazy afternoon, it's a major, life-changing event.
Major, life-changing events are the spice of the game. They shouldn't happen every week; if they don't happen at least once in a character's lifetime, then it's not really worth playing them.
Also, if the culture is extensively developed, there is such a thing as respect for the other players' time and effort.
Sure, and I agree with that, but that's even more true of IC effort. I find it much more worthwhile to see something built through the game than something prepared in a sandbox.
-
I always disagreed, for example, with people who start a realm through colony or secession and then decide "This is going to be a Viking/Samurai/whatever realm". It is fine to play your character that way; it is fine to play your ruler that way and favor other characters who go along with it; but I don't think it's fine to say OOC "This is the way "we" want this realm set up and if you don't like it you should go away".
Was that Bedwyr's point? That it was a vote the entire realm took part in and not just the ruler and her friends saying, "We're mercenaries now".
-
Was that Bedwyr's point? That it was a vote the entire realm took part in and not just the ruler and her friends saying, "We're mercenaries now".
What if you're a new player? Is it acceptable to say "We held a OOC vote two weeks ago and the results was that we would be mercenaries"?
What if you didn't want to be a mercenary but were outvoted? Do you leave the realm, or do you play your character as opposing the mercenery idea? But if you're allowed to just go against the new culture of the realm, then why hold a OOC vote in the first place?
Note that it is fine to play mercenaries, I have no problem with that. I only have a problem with the whole idea of OOC voting. I don't even have a problem if three or four people decide OOC that they will take their character in a certain direction beforehand, as long as they allow other to join them afterwards; but three or four people is a free association. The realm should not be a OOC meaningful unit.
-
What if you're a new player? Is it acceptable to say "We held a OOC vote two weeks ago and the results was that we would be mercenaries"?
Honestly? Too frigging bad. If a realm has a specific culture, it'll likely go into the realm summary newbies see before they join, so if they don't want to be mercenaries, don't join the mercenary realm.
What if you didn't want to be a mercenary but were outvoted?
Again, too bad. Majority rules. That's why we have votes. And you're really kinda using the extremes here. I very much doubt any realm has ever gone, "YOU MUST BE MERCENARIES AND RP AS SUCH OR YOU GET BANNED!!1!!1! I'm sure Arcaea had people who didn't RP as mercenaries and they were accepted fine.
Note that it is fine to play mercenaries, I have no problem with that. I only have a problem with the whole idea of OOC voting. I don't even have a problem if three or four people decide OOC that they will take their character in a certain direction beforehand, as long as they allow other to join them afterwards; but three or four people is a free association. The realm should not be a OOC meaningful unit.
That's your opinion. You're perfectly entitled to it. But stop trying to tell other people:
that's wrong.
-
What if you're a new player? Is it acceptable to say "We held a OOC vote two weeks ago and the results was that we would be mercenaries"?
Does the reason matter? "we're a mercenary realm" is the fact, it should be in the realm bulleting so your new player knew it before he joined the realm. Complaining about the sky being blue is dishonest.
Really, it doesn't matter much if the vote was OOC or IC, as long as it was not exclusive.
What if you didn't want to be a mercenary but were outvoted?
Again, the "OOC" in there doesn't matter, so this is entirely besides the point.
Note that it is fine to play mercenaries, I have no problem with that. I only have a problem with the whole idea of OOC voting. I don't even have a problem if three or four people decide OOC that they will take their character in a certain direction beforehand, as long as they allow other to join them afterwards; but three or four people is a free association. The realm should not be a OOC meaningful unit.
I don't mind realms having cultures, flavors and all that. Yeah, it's nicer to have a history behind it, things that really happened in the game. Just making a vote is certainly the least optimal approach, and you should only use it if things have gone pretty dull.
But I don't see anything wrong with people in a realm having a discussion about what their realm should be like, and then making it so.
-
What if you're a new player? Is it acceptable to say "We held a OOC vote two weeks ago and the results was that we would be mercenaries"?
Then live with it, or leave. What happens when someone joins Darka, but doesn't like mercenaries?
What if you didn't want to be a mercenary but were outvoted? Do you leave the realm, or do you play your character as opposing the mercenery idea? But if you're allowed to just go against the new culture of the realm, then why hold a OOC vote in the first place?
Because having the discussion OOC allowed people to talk frankly about all the options and allow some change of characters to fit the new idea. Some didn't like the idea, and either left or began working to see it overturned IC (though I think most of them actually voted for it OOC, they just liked the idea of fighting it IC), which it was with the next Ruler.
Note that it is fine to play mercenaries, I have no problem with that. I only have a problem with the whole idea of OOC voting. I don't even have a problem if three or four people decide OOC that they will take their character in a certain direction beforehand, as long as they allow other to join them afterwards; but three or four people is a free association. The realm should not be a OOC meaningful unit.
I would much rather have the realm have an open, honest discussion about how to make the game more fun than a couple of people quietly deciding OOC to change things.
-
Then live with it, or leave. What happens when someone joins Darka, but doesn't like mercenaries?
Because having the discussion OOC allowed people to talk frankly about all the options and allow some change of characters to fit the new idea. Some didn't like the idea, and either left or began working to see it overturned IC (though I think most of them actually voted for it OOC, they just liked the idea of fighting it IC), which it was with the next Ruler.
I would much rather have the realm have an open, honest discussion about how to make the game more fun than a couple of people quietly deciding OOC to change things.
.. and kill what is major fun for many eventually. when someone make ic clique, he has to make efforts about it, and someone else can make counter-clique and here it is, some ic struggle.
open and honest ooc dicussion mostly means avoidance of any possible ic disputes at one, forever.
what you mentioned about darka, in that respect, means nonone will ever be able to make any opposition there, as everything about the realm is agreed ic "to make game more funny", now how to counter that at all? that is agreed occ, voted on ooc, and apparently the only way to go against it is to initiate counter-discussion and counter-voting ooc.
if that is not utmost case of exclusion of all who think differently, i cannot imagine better example. if you put something on ic vote, it can get 90% win, but still those 10% can defy secretly or openly and that is the game.
if that is put ooc, than when anyone in realm notices some opposition, he can say" "look, we agreed how to play. you are not allowed to oppose it. leave!"
that is absurd. internal grievances would have potential to be major factor in creating game events and fun, and this way it is sterilized forever.
to resume - in my opinion "honest ooc discussion how to make game funny" is perfect fun-killer. what some people obviously want is complete predictability and avoidance of competition.
-
You didn't pay the slightest attention to my points about people immediately beginning to plot against it IC, did you? Nor the fact that they succeeded in changing it? Nor the fact that the reason it started is because everyone in the realm agreed things were dead dull?
-
what you mentioned about darka, in that respect, means nonone will ever be able to make any opposition there
Just as an aside, there have been many, many IC discussions in Darka over the past couple years about giving up the whole mercenary thing.
Also:
in my opinion "honest ooc discussion how to make game funny" is perfect fun-killer. what some people obviously want is complete predictability and avoidance of competition.
OOC discussion in the realm does not mean that you have to avoid IC conflict. Players can discuss OOC the types of play they like, and then IC guide the realm in that direction. That does not remove fun, or even conflict. In fact, it can help people have /more/ fun, by helping tailor the game experience toward something that the players like. That could just as easily be /toward/ something with more intra-realm as it could be toward something with less of the same. Realms like Republic of Fwuvoghor thrived on IC conflict, and the players there loved it.
-
You didn't pay the slightest attention to my points about people immediately beginning to plot against it IC, did you? Nor the fact that they succeeded in changing it? Nor the fact that the reason it started is because everyone in the realm agreed things were dead dull?
I guess I wouldn't have felt the right to do so if I had been in that situation. I would have put it under the "play as you would play a board game with friends" rule; you don't go sabotaging things that have been agreed, even if you disagree that it should have been agreed.
If it happens to me, I'll grow a pair.
-
I dunno, I wreck all kinds of things in board games with my friends. I guess it depends on how knockaround your friends are maybe?
I'd be interested to see if the proof is in the pudding, but let's be honest about what realms really are. They are player groups, and different player groups are going to play games differently even if it's the same game. Hell, not everyone wants the same things out of the game.
My point is that there is no Panancea. What happened in Arcaea worked there, maybe it wouldn't work elsewhere, maybe it would, but elsewhere is going to have different players with different attitudes. Trying to say "This will work in all cases!" is trying to put the ocean in a paper cup.
-
You also don't need to have 100% of the people adhere to a concept for it to work.
For example, if we set outselves a theme in a D&D group where we are to be mercenary assassins, not everybody would need to pickup the rogue class with assassin subclass. Not do they all have to RP their characters as liking the life of an assassin.
-
You didn't pay the slightest attention to my points about people immediately beginning to plot against it IC, did you? Nor the fact that they succeeded in changing it? Nor the fact that the reason it started is because everyone in the realm agreed things were dead dull?
i did notice what you mentioned, but could not imagine it. why in the first place, why would you need to put that all things ooc when you have clear plan what to do ic, than you can implement it in whatever way you want - through realm laws, guilds and councils - and to deal with all possible opposition in it? what would ever be the reason to put that things ooc if not to meta-game.
you likely did not want that people recognize you as arrogant ruler, so you explained your action in advance, to clear what are you doing, to prevent most of opposition.
i already had situation when realm i was ruling was stuck into apathy, and my ruler-char begin with actions which turned ca. one third of nobility into opposition, which never existed before, but i never sent a single word of ooc explanation that my new initiative came from boredom, taking all consequences which could occur.
now indirik can say that i am imposing the others how to play, but it is not me, but game rules which are created and upheld for long, for better game quality. ooc is intended for players to talk about their absence or ask questions, discuss issues which cannot be brought to game world by other means.
ooc has nothing to do with internal policy plans, that would be the same when in the middle of theater play, actors would take off their costumes and begin explaining to visitors that "they are not so bad guys as their characters, and have to do some nasty things because of scenario demands". that is simply game-killer, and those who use it become monopolistic game-owners excluding everyone who want to play game according to game rules.
as a individual game player who simply wants to play game as it is intended according to game rules described, i feel completely overpowered by ooc clans on one side and different kind of meta-gaming on the other, and i have no chance to oppose such prevailing powers materialized through madly monolithic character slot-hives.
if you play chess you are forbidden to leave your table to discuss your game with others, which also applies to each and every game which has any sort of competition included.
-
Just as an aside, there have been many, many IC discussions in Darka over the past couple years about giving up the whole mercenary thing.
Also:OOC discussion in the realm does not mean that you have to avoid IC conflict. Players can discuss OOC the types of play they like, and then IC guide the realm in that direction. That does not remove fun, or even conflict. In fact, it can help people have /more/ fun, by helping tailor the game experience toward something that the players like. That could just as easily be /toward/ something with more intra-realm as it could be toward something with less of the same. Realms like Republic of Fwuvoghor thrived on IC conflict, and the players there loved it.
again i heard no single word of explanation why would anything of it be needed to be planned ooc? if you like some sort of players experience, found guild with such rules involved and play to try to achieve it, you may succeed or not. if there are many players that like such course, why would not you succeed? what ooc talking has to do with it?
i would summarize my opinion as simple as possible: any kind of ooc planning related to anything in game world kills the best and the funniest part of bm and is likely one of causes why we have dead-boring realms around where nothing ever happens.
to be as clear as possible - i find any kind of such ooc planning completely and absolutely unfair.
-
that would be the same when in the middle of theater play, actors would take off their costumes and begin explaining to visitors that "they are not so bad guys as their characters, and have to do some nasty things because of scenario demands".
Thank you, this is exactly how I feel.
Of course, the actors can talk to each others behind the scene. Not all theater has to be improv, after all. It's fine to follow a script.
But if you're including everyone in the theater, then it's not really theater anymore, is it? There has to be an audience.
-
I'll be perfectly honest and say that I really don't care for roleplaying my characters as well as I could. I say this coming from a very long and intensive roleplaying background (bringing some BM players into a new game, even). IMO, roleplay by letter doesn't allow for the kind of quick feedback necessary to develop a character that's exciting to play. Maybe some people like to completely script their character story, but I don't. Half the fun comes from dialog and interaction, and we don't really have that in the same way other RP-heavy games do. It's possible, but for me it requires more effort than I'm willing to give at the moment.
Instead, I usually just take a piece of my own personality, or some concept/dynamic that I've been eager to explore, and infuse my character with it. I don't see a problem with playing this way because I've always been up front about it. That doesn't mean there needs to be an OOC planning, but I think we've done such a wonderful job of ruining trust between players with PvP and infighting that it's often necessary to accomplish anything at all.
There are very few players who remain entirely in character, avoid OOC discussion, and still manage to have long, productive and eventful character lives. Most players that claim to do so are, in my experience, overstating their case. The point of this screed is just to say that this is a very old issue that boils down to principle and playing style. There's no right or wrong about it.
EDIT: After reading a few more posts, I'm really getting tired of seeing the same people conjuring up OOC bogeymen and plots to compensate for their incredibly !@#$ty circumstances IC.