BattleMaster Community

BattleMaster => Locals => Dwilight => Topic started by: Sacha on January 07, 2012, 12:45:16 PM

Title: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Sacha on January 07, 2012, 12:45:16 PM
Just curious to see after all the Zuma talk in the other topic how many people like or dislike the Zuma/Daimon presence, or if they even know what they are.

Personally, I voted no, for reasons explained in the saltiness topic.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Lefanis on January 07, 2012, 01:49:51 PM
One of my best experiences in BM was when my character visted the Zuma. The Daimon characters there went the extra mile there to make some fantastic RPs, though my character was the only one there to appreciate it.

I voted yes, daimons in the west  made the colonisation of dwilight all the more interesting to me, and in my experience,  they have been forthcoming about the reason for their existence, and most willing to talk. Maybe things changed after they decided to have an ambassador.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Telrunya on January 07, 2012, 02:03:11 PM
I love the Zuma and they have been a major point of interest to me. My thanks to Zuma GM for his effort, it's not an easy task by far.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 07, 2012, 02:14:34 PM
I voted I don't know anything about them lololol.

For anyone skeptical, the fact that I (well, Garret) exist should be an indication that it's possible to have a rewarding interaction(s) with the Zuma. I'm not a GM, I'm not part of the Development Team, I'm not in Tom's circle of friends. I'm pretty much some random dude who showed up and did stuff and stuff happened.

A lot of people, I think, happen to have their own little fantasies about how Dwilight should be. Nothing wrong with that, since ambitious humans tend to do that. I'm sure if we polled everyone who is or wants to be ruler on Dwilight you'll see just as many different responses of what their Dwilight would look like.

But people tend to forget to account for the Zuma in their fantasies. That's normal. We tend to filter out inconveniences. But that's also not what a capable ambitious human does. Those people can plan contingencies in case something doesn't work out, and they know how to deal with uncertainty. Obviously you want to do as few things blind as possible, but sometimes you have no choice and you must roll the dice. The more capable ambitious people have been the ones who planned well enough that the dice roll did not change much in the ultimate course of their plot.

Are you guys doing it? Gathering from the responses, those who are actually expressing their opinions on an uncertainty are not very capable people in terms of being ambitious characters. I reckon those who keep to themselves regarding the Zuma are going to be the ones who come out on top in the end.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 07, 2012, 04:52:15 PM
I think the Zuma GM is doing a fine job. I think the Zuma have several roles, and we, as players, can pick.

For example, someone recently tried to use the Zuma to destroy Terran. --use of Zuma as a weapon
And Terran was accused of trying to unite other realms against the Zuma--use of Zuma as a uniting force or crusade excuse (Manifest path comes to mind)
And the Zuma are willing to buy food for good prices--use of Zuma as a source of income

Don't like the Zuma? Move to the east, coward.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 06:29:07 PM
I will note that most people who like the Zuma thus far aren't playing in realms that actually have to deal with the Zuma, except only very sporadically, or through proxies. For those who actually have to deal with them, it's another story.

I voted I don't know anything about them lololol.

For anyone skeptical, the fact that I (well, Garret) exist should be an indication that it's possible to have a rewarding interaction(s) with the Zuma. I'm not a GM, I'm not part of the Development Team, I'm not in Tom's circle of friends. I'm pretty much some random dude who showed up and did stuff and stuff happened.

A lot of people, I think, happen to have their own little fantasies about how Dwilight should be. Nothing wrong with that, since ambitious humans tend to do that. I'm sure if we polled everyone who is or wants to be ruler on Dwilight you'll see just as many different responses of what their Dwilight would look like.

But people tend to forget to account for the Zuma in their fantasies. That's normal. We tend to filter out inconveniences. But that's also not what a capable ambitious human does. Those people can plan contingencies in case something doesn't work out, and they know how to deal with uncertainty. Obviously you want to do as few things blind as possible, but sometimes you have no choice and you must roll the dice. The more capable ambitious people have been the ones who planned well enough that the dice roll did not change much in the ultimate course of their plot.

Are you guys doing it? Gathering from the responses, those who are actually expressing their opinions on an uncertainty are not very capable people in terms of being ambitious characters. I reckon those who keep to themselves regarding the Zuma are going to be the ones who come out on top in the end.

You call it a fantasy, I call it trying to have an RPed plot. And, yes, I have accounted for the Zuma in things Hireshmont does. But the Zuma act without reference to anyone else's RP.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 07, 2012, 06:40:32 PM
When a bunch of ants do their stuff, and have amazing Nobel Prize winning roleplay literature, do you as a human give a crap when you decide you feel like having a chuckle and flooding their anthill?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on January 07, 2012, 06:41:02 PM
I will note that most people who like the Zuma thus far aren't playing in realms that actually have to deal with the Zuma, except only very sporadically, or through proxies. For those who actually have to deal with them, it's another story.

If I didn't have some strong reasons to be on the other side of the continent, I'd be happy to play near the Zuma.  Seems like the second-most-interesting part of Dwilight to me. (The first, of course, is Luria, but then I'm biased ;) )

Quote
You call it a fantasy, I call it trying to have an RPed plot. And, yes, I have accounted for the Zuma in things Hireshmont does. But the Zuma act without reference to anyone else's RP.

Um...so do other people.

I mean, seriously? You come in here, proclaim that you know all about what the Zuma are doing (and you hate it), and you're accusing them of acting without reference to your RP?

What unmitigated arrogance.

Did you ever stop to consider, Lyman, that maybe you're the one who's not acting with reference to their RP? They were there first, after all.

You have had so many opportunities to go to the Zuma and learn more about them firsthand, but no: you've got them pegged, and you know exactly what they're all about, and you don't want any part of it.

Heaven forbid you should actually consider what other people—regular players or GMs—have as their RP rather than deciding it for them.

(And to be honest, I'm really very surprised about this, because in general, you've always seemed to be pretty reasonable about that sort of thing. You never bitched OOC on the rare occasions when Delvin managed to spoil Hireshmont's plans. Is it really so hard to just think of them as another player—just one with different resources at their disposal?)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 07, 2012, 06:57:12 PM
But the Zuma act without reference to anyone else's RP.

Please stop stating this as fact. It is wrong. It is a lie.
Everything the Zuma do is in relation to interactions they have had with players.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 07:09:41 PM
Please stop stating this as fact. It is wrong. It is a lie.
Everything the Zuma do is in relation to interactions they have had with players.

A very few, isolated players, without much influence with anyone anywhere.

Haktoo went to war, from all appearances, over one region being taken that nobody knew the Zuma claimed when identical things had been done in the past without Zuma responses, then opened up a second war because of a message from a commoner who nobody had heard of before the incident.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: LilWolf on January 07, 2012, 07:15:30 PM
I don't like daimons being on the island. I've felt that way the first time I heard they were on the island.

Beluaterra is for them. Leave the rest of the islands to the players.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 07:20:10 PM
I mean, seriously? You come in here, proclaim that you know all about what the Zuma are doing (and you hate it), and you're accusing them of acting without reference to your RP?

I loathe Gygaxian GMs/DMs. The job of a GM is not to force players through any means necessary to obey their plot plans.

Did you ever stop to consider, Lyman, that maybe you're the one who's not acting with reference to their RP? They were there first, after all.

In an open-ended game like BM, I personally don't think the GM's RP plans should be considered. They were there first--- by, like, 3 days or something because I was on vacation. And, even then... is it the same GM? I honestly don't know. If it's not, then I promise you: I was there first. But that's actually not relevant. "I was there first!" is a remarkably silly argument. And it's funny that I hear it repeated both ICly and OOCly.

You have had so many opportunities to go to the Zuma and learn more about them firsthand, but no: you've got them pegged, and you know exactly what they're all about, and you don't want any part of it.

And I have used those opportunities and learned a fairly small amount. And no, I don't have the Zuma pegged. I don't know what they're about. I just know that they have not yet exhibited any interesting behavior, and have actively and passively prevented most players in the area from doing the things those players found rewarding (personally, the Zuma have not interfered in that many of Hireshmont's plans for himself or Terran, though they may be starting to, but I've gotten many complaints from Terran's military types).

Heaven forbid you should actually consider what other people—regular players or GMs—have as their RP rather than deciding it for them.

I do consider what other people have as their RP. But I don't see GMs as having a right to an independent story. They should be facilitators for the players. Again, I have always understand BM (with an exception of Beluaterra during invasions) as a basically player-generated and open-ended game. And Dwilight was the apex of this, IMHO. If that is not the case; if, in fact, Dwilight actually has some plot we're all actually supposed to follow... I'll actually be very disappointed.

(And to be honest, I'm really very surprised about this, because in general, you've always seemed to be pretty reasonable about that sort of thing. You never bitched OOC on the rare occasions when Delvin managed to spoil Hireshmont's plans. Is it really so hard to just think of them as another player—just one with different resources at their disposal?)

Rare occasions? You were spoiler #1. And yes, I do take these things well. I reiterate: I'm not complaing that the Zuma GM has ruined Hireshmont's plans! He hasn't! Hireshmont's plans involve the Moot staying out of the war in Madina, having friendly relations with Astroism, and keeping the Lurias at a safe distance, and everybody having plenty of food. The Zuma have helped Hireshmont achieve all of these things. Hireshmont's plans were closest to failing the day before the Zuma attacked. Since then, they have handed him victory after victory. They're not doing it intentionally, of course. But, ultimately, I as a player don't want Hireshmont to "win," because his ideal means a few largish stable states with stable governments that never go to war and all get along. And the Zuma have basically rescued that vision from the jaws of defeat.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 07:32:40 PM
A very few, isolated players, without much influence with anyone anywhere.

Haktoo went to war, from all appearances, over one region being taken that nobody knew the Zuma claimed when identical things had been done in the past without Zuma responses, then opened up a second war because of a message from a commoner who nobody had heard of before the incident.

Actually, I take that back.

The march north still has the chilling effect of fairly idle speech leading to drastic consequences; but Turin is not an isolated player with little influence.

I was primarily thinking of Terrence's various accusations and messages.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on January 07, 2012, 07:34:06 PM
Haktoo went to war, from all appearances, over one region being taken that nobody knew the Zuma claimed when identical things had been done in the past without Zuma responses, then opened up a second war because of a message from a commoner who nobody had heard of before the incident.

They're still players, and their interaction is still meaningful. Not only rulers are allowed to play the game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 07, 2012, 07:49:35 PM
I will note that most people who like the Zuma thus far aren't playing in realms that actually have to deal with the Zuma, except only very sporadically, or through proxies. For those who actually have to deal with them, it's another story.

You call it a fantasy, I call it trying to have an RPed plot. And, yes, I have accounted for the Zuma in things Hireshmont does. But the Zuma act without reference to anyone else's RP.

And yet Gornak not only is a member of D'Hara, allied with Barca and Terran, but he has visited the Zuma and sold them 200 bushels of food. No, not a large amount, it was mostly a feasibility study. And as the player of Gornak, I think they are fun.

A very few, isolated players, without much influence with anyone anywhere.

Haktoo went to war, from all appearances, over one region being taken that nobody knew the Zuma claimed when identical things had been done in the past without Zuma responses, then opened up a second war because of a message from a commoner who nobody had heard of before the incident.

And yet, many of the players in D'Hara (those there the 18 months I have played, at least) were well aware that Barca needed to get permission from the Zuma before taking Eregon, and thought the Barcans stupid and reckless for not talking to Garret beforehand. Were they not aware that D'Hara needed permission to take Paisly? Barca is a Terran colony, and I know that Terran has had incidents as well. I think the Zuma responded to Eregon's takeover and corresponding military presence in a consistent manner.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 08:00:11 PM
And yet, many of the players in D'Hara (those there the 18 months I have played, at least) were well aware that Barca needed to get permission from the Zuma before taking Eregon, and thought the Barcans stupid and reckless for not talking to Garret beforehand. Were they not aware that D'Hara needed permission to take Paisly? Barca is a Terran colony, and I know that Terran has had incidents as well. I think the Zuma responded to Eregon's takeover and corresponding military presence in a consistent manner.

Yes, they should have asked permission. We knew that, you knew that, most Barcans knew that. But previous incidents have not resulted in threats to destroy the entire realm, demands for significant amounts of items (with time limits), and, ultimately, an attempt to create a puppet state. Though that last, as I understand it, was actually quite thoroughly RPed and well-motivated; looks to be the first interesting thing the Zuma have done since Hireshmont's been ruler.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on January 07, 2012, 08:26:18 PM
When Dwilight was first announced, I was very excited about the prospect of a 'serious' medieval atmosphere.

Then it turned out to be huge (not a bad thing, it's an impressive map) but the one character limitation meant that it was and has always been underpopulated. Every realm I've been in in Dwilight (Madina, Fissoa, Luria Nova, and Terran) has had less activity on its busiest days than most realms I've been in elsewhere, because they all have 20-30 players rather than 40-60 players. This isn't just a Dwilight thing (I know the player population has been going down anyway) but it's exacerbated because of the character limitation. So already the 'serious' medieval atmosphere is off to a tough start because you don't have enough people to fill out all the ranks. Everybody is a region lord.

Then you have the Zuma. I have to say that I haven't had a lot of direct interaction - mostly I've witnessed Terran's / Hireshmont's interaction. It seems like they are run well, that is to say, the GMs seem to put a lot of thought and effort into them. My problem is that they just aren't SMA. Not for me, at least. It's fantasy on a continent that was supposed to be seriously medieval, and instead it's consequently less seriously medieval because the nature of the game is now man vs. nature rather than man vs. man. For some people, this is legitimately a cool thing. For me, it's not interesting, because it's not what I like about BM.

Having said that, I think there used to be more 'SMA' players 5 years ago -- when I was more active and had some friends playing -- than there are now. Today we seem to have a lot more 'team sports in knight costume' players, and for that, the Zuma could be just what the doctor ordered.  If I were a BM GM, I'd say it's a tough call as to whether you want to cater to the players you have, or the players you want.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 07, 2012, 08:33:28 PM
Yes, they should have asked permission. We knew that, you knew that, most Barcans knew that. But previous incidents have not resulted in threats to destroy the entire realm, demands for significant amounts of items (with time limits), and, ultimately, an attempt to create a puppet state. Though that last, as I understand it, was actually quite thoroughly RPed and well-motivated; looks to be the first interesting thing the Zuma have done since Hireshmont's been ruler.

Again you speak without knowing the actual facts. It was not the single matter of taking the region that brought about the demands. There has never been any attempt to make a puppet state, however you may choose to view any of the events that have taken place.

It would be very beneficial for people if you actually made it clear when you were speculating on things rather than continuing to state things as if that are fact.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 08:39:46 PM
Again you speak without knowing the actual facts. It was not the single matter of taking the region that brought about the demands. There has never been any attempt to make a puppet state, however you may choose to view any of the events that have taken place.

It would be very beneficial for people if you actually made it clear when you were speculating on things rather than continuing to state things as if that are fact.

Alternatively, you could read and realize that whatever the plotline in your head is, this is how it has been broadly perceived. Your goals may have been entirely other, but you may have failed to accomplish them. Maybe the Barcans were rude too; wouldn't surprise me. Julius can be abrasive.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 08:45:49 PM
They're still players, and their interaction is still meaningful. Not only rulers are allowed to play the game.

Sorry I missed this earlier.

That's entirely true, and I didn't mean to imply that only powerful players should be able/allowed to determine the plot.

However, if Terrence had sent a comparable message to, say, any human or non-GM ruler, the reaction might have been strong, but would have been categorically different. And would have been manageable in multiple means: we could have fought that human realm or negotiated. As it was, fighting the Zuma was not a realistic option for the Moot (and anyone who disagrees with that... take your knowledge to Beluaterra, because you've apparently solved the Invasion there), and the massive response caught us so off guard that any kind of creatively RPed politics wasn't manageable (especially since Haktoo doesn't go in for nuance anyways).
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 07, 2012, 10:01:08 PM
Well, there's no way to make everyone happy. Sometimes, you can't even make one person happy.

So...Vellos, if you really think that your opinion matters so much and that your idea of Dwilight is much superior, then bring that up officially with Tom or someone who can in fact make such a change. And try to do that privately since that would probably make the person judging your idea more content. If you don't want to do that, then spewing out what amounts to angry poo poo on a forum isn't going to help much. It'll just spiral eventually to a glorified flame war, and given the history of flammability some players have, that'll just send this entire topic into meaningless donkey braying.

And in the end, that probably won't change how things go.

But hey, double standards. I wonder what exactly Hireshmont does in Terran that makes it any more interesting. Because you know, I am of the opinion that Terran is a !@#$ boring place that quivers in fear of the daimons because they think they can't beat them (Well, did you ever actually try? Probably too scared even to do that, which only perpetuates part of your perceived boredom. If YOU even prefer stagnancy, then that's really your problem.)

But no, despite all your big talk about how you don't care about how the Zuma can go ahead and destroy Terran, you won't dare to do that. You know why? Because you're too chicken for it. Your idea of something interesting might not necessarily be compatible with the position your realm is in. You want a story but you're way too cautious in your approach. That only means you'll get a conservative response. You up your risk, you probably sputter and die. But hey, least it's something. And at least then you shut up about how boring things are.

Hm, I wonder if Terran knows that, you know...there are other human realms that probably can affect them way more than the Zuma ever could.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 07, 2012, 11:57:34 PM
Because you know, I am of the opinion that Terran is a !@#$ boring place that quivers in fear of the daimons because they think they can't beat them (Well, did you ever actually try? Probably too scared even to do that, which only perpetuates part of your perceived boredom. If YOU even prefer stagnancy, then that's really your problem.)

Are you being serious? No, you're not. Because, yeah, I'd rather Terran survive than not. Duh. I'm not saying that I WANT Terran destroyed; just that I'd rather have the Zuma actually do something than just sit around and be agents of stagnation.

But no, despite all your big talk about how you don't care about how the Zuma can go ahead and destroy Terran, you won't dare to do that. You know why? Because you're too chicken for it. Your idea of something interesting might not necessarily be compatible with the position your realm is in. You want a story but you're way too cautious in your approach. That only means you'll get a conservative response. You up your risk, you probably sputter and die. But hey, least it's something. And at least then you shut up about how boring things are.

Hm, I wonder if Terran knows that, you know...there are other human realms that probably can affect them way more than the Zuma ever could.

I won't dare do what? You didn't establish what you were talking about. Won't dare attack the Zuma? No, not unless we have to. Because we would obviously lose. Again, unless somebody has discovered some special daimon-killing tactic. Items help some, but not enough to radically change the odds. We know the Zuma can hop across the Root River, meaning even positioning our troops would be a pain; we know that the Zuma like to have food, but we also know that they managed to field armies much bigger than ours during times when they weren't getting much food. We have good reason to believe they're all played by one GM, meaning coordination and activity isn't much of an issue. We also know that Underroot jabs deep into Terran's heartland, exposing most of the realm.

We also know we reap a huge dividend from having the Zuma as neighbors in terms of reduced monster-spawns.

There are already many interesting stories in Dwilight. The opinion I have been expressing is that I, and many other players, have been unable to discern the Zuma's story and, insofar as we have been able to observe it, it does not appear to be very interesting; or at least not nearly as interesting as other available ones.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 01:17:52 AM
lol time for other "Vellos bitches" thread.

Ok, you said the magic words at the end of your last post. So they're not as interesting as other available stories? Then go read those, duh. Even my cousin's kid knows that if he doesn't like a book he can go pick up a different one.

Then you shall inevitably say something like "Then why are they there?"

Ahem, are you really suggesting that only stories that satisfy your most distinguished taste are allowed in this game where a lot of people don't even know English as their first language?

In a nutshell: Get real man. Not many of us here are novelists, yourself included otherwise I would have picked up something written by Lyman Stone at my public library. Some people like what's going on, some people like you don't. Just don't keep stomping on your soapbox proclaiming stupid poo poo.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on January 08, 2012, 01:29:36 AM
Speaking only for myself, and keeping in mind that I haven't really seen anything other than your Arcaea character, there is quite a lot of distance between 'serious novelist' and 'guy who writes letters about fired chicken and ESPN.'  Yeah, I get that they fried food in the middle ages. It's not a basis for RPing a noble character, so if you're a leading player on Dwilight, I hope Fred is your comic relief valve.

There is a lot of mediocre RP on BM and always has been, but most of the time it's because people don't have a lot of experience in a written forum. I've seen quite a few of them turn out really good stuff after a while, but I'd take even the mediocre attempt over a troll.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 01:32:53 AM
I tend to agree with Vellos regarding his Zuma criticisms. The other thing we have to worry about is if we OOC say something here, whats to stop the Zuma GM's/Artemesia from extracting ingame revenge for what we say on the forums. 

Before we started talking about a world war with the Zumans nothing had happened for months. Then everyone started talking and what happens to Zuma start marching around and attacking stuff.

We know they have huge armies
We know they can fly over lakes and rivers bypassing chokepoints
We know they are controlled by one GM
We know that this GM doesn't talk to us unless we go directly there to talk, who knows if he also plays on Dwilight with his other account, he could be Artemesia for all we know.
We know that they need food
We don't know that if we do manage to beat them back will the GM just inject another 25,00000Cs into the game claiming netherworld recruitment, or returning with a vaster army recreating Bel on Dwilight for the next million years.

I really don't mind the Zuma, What I do mind is if the Zuma don't play by the same rules we play by. If they play by our same rules and we see their massive armies starving and lands revolting and other things like losing regions to monsters then I'll trust them, until then they are just a super-uber force to stymie PVP and keep western Dwilight ground under its thumb.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 02:22:13 AM
Man, y'all are so confident that you'd do better jobs it seems. Well let's hear it: How would YOU do it? Remember, you'll have to describe what you'd do from the start of Dwilight, and how you'd respond to the situations the Zuma have encountered. I can list some for you, but obviously that's not everything.

More importantly, you talk like this because just about all of you posting have never ever been NPC players. Most of you have never had the power to summon NPC units that admittedly are really strong. Most of you don't even know what you're talking about because most people don't know how they'll respond to temptation until they attain it.

Y'all think you can do a better job? What, you mean talk a bunch to others? Without revealing everything about how your faction works? Because you know, becoming a GM usually means you have a !@#$ton more restrictions than ever before, and I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to just out and say what you're here for. In fact I'm fairly certain the Zuma GM is not supposed to overtly state what the Zuma's purpose is.

And y'all can BS all you want right now about how you wouldn't think about roflstomping other realms. Right. Sure. I know almost all of you bitching about how you can do a better job would just as soon use your newfound daimon summoning powers to go !@#$ up realms as you please once you gain that ability if you knew you would face no consequences for doing that. Because, when it comes down to it, the current Zuma GM probably could just out and wipe out Dwilight. It would piss off a lot of people, but there's really nothing I know that's stopping him. That said, you really think you wouldn't ever be tempted to go rage?

Anyway, if we're talking about strictly language skills, then I'd say that the current contributions made by the GM are not lacking in any technical sense. Yes, Haktoo uses weird syntax. I've since noticed that's kind of the point. In roleplaying events you'd notice that the English is normal and that the tone is generally one that is trying to inspire you to feel some sort of dread. That brings me to an important point because I've played with five different (Well possibly 4 different) daimon-type GMs: Prudent, Cimmerian, Sherilynn (A human, but still GM during 4th Inv), Haktoo, and Vates. To date, I consider Haktoo's roleplays to have the most intimidating tone that is proper for what really amounts to a DARK TERRIFYING DEMONIC BEING of your nightmares. Seriously, are you going to tell your kids to talk to the Boogeyman? He'll just eat them before any of that happens. If anything I'd say be glad the daimons haven't just killed you for the lulz, because in my opinion (which is far from humble like most of yours as well might I add) that's probably the more realistic reaction they'd have. But hey, I benefited from not being immediately killed for the lulz, so I'm not complaining.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 08, 2012, 02:25:38 AM
We know the Zuma can hop across the Root River...
FWIW - This is incorrect. They cannot, and did not do this. They merely slipped by you without anyone noticing the actual path they took.

But Hireshmont claimed IC that they flew over the river, and Brance believes him, because he doesn't know that the Zuma can't do that.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 08, 2012, 02:30:03 AM
lol time for other "Vellos bitches" thread.

Ok, you said the magic words at the end of your last post. So they're not as interesting as other available stories? Then go read those, duh. Even my cousin's kid knows that if he doesn't like a book he can go pick up a different one.

Then you shall inevitably say something like "Then why are they there?"

Ahem, are you really suggesting that only stories that satisfy your most distinguished taste are allowed in this game where a lot of people don't even know English as their first language?

In a nutshell: Get real man. Not many of us here are novelists, yourself included otherwise I would have picked up something written by Lyman Stone at my public library. Some people like what's going on, some people like you don't. Just don't keep stomping on your soapbox proclaiming stupid poo poo.

You of all people should not be putting someone else down about their posting. If most people can manage to be civil about what passes for your posts, you should be able to disagree with someone without resorting to ad hominem attacks, yes?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 02:33:38 AM
Isn't that the whole point though? I've learned from the best goons.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 08, 2012, 02:41:10 AM
BM is largely player driven, and from my point of view, which due to circumstances and OOC relationships I have with some of the players of characters that HAVE managed to pierce some of the Zuma puzzle is perhaps better informed then most, the Zuma are almost completely player driven. The GM would appear to have some guidelines on how to react, but the important thing here is he REACTS to what the players do.

Many, oh so many of the interactions with the Zuma that lead to things actually happening, are never revealed, and most have no idea that they even happen. This is a player fault, since the players involved decide not to share, decide not to post the RP's to the wiki, or gloat in the game or whatever. It is not the GM's job to ensure there is some repository that would reveal just how much stuff happens between the Zuma and players. It is a volunteer role that already consumes a fair bit of time without them having to archive everything as well.

Could the Zuma respond to all the noble whining WHY are you doing this. Quite possibly, but the little I understand about the Zuma frame of mind would suggest that would make little sense to them. You don't tend to tell a insect why you are about to squash them after all. Perhaps everyone would prefer that the Zuma are internally inconsistent just so they can see behind the curtain, but then I'm sure people would like to be able to see all the hidden political dealings between human realms as well, wouldn't they.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 08, 2012, 02:51:54 AM
I don't like the Zuma. Dwilight was not advertised as an island with NPC presence, a la Beluaterra, so their presence can correctly be said to be a surprise that was sprung on the players without their input or any chance to decline their presence ahead of time.

The essence of Vellos' argument should not be construed as an attack on the Zuma GM. The essence of the argument is that the very presence of an NPC faction of unknowable and quite possibly (effectively) unlimited power does by it's very nature warp the player to player interaction that would otherwise be taking place and that, normally, forms the essence of Battlemaster. Like a black hole, their existence is a plot sink. All other plots in its vicinity are inexorably drawn to it. You can't really afford to ignore them, because maybe somebody else won't. Your every action must be carefully considered in light of what effect it might have on the Zuma. Your every plan must take into account what might happen if the Zuma suddenly wake up and decide to interfere with you. The argument that the Zuma respond only to player stimulus doesn't matter, because even if you assiduously avoid provoking them, you must always take into account the possibility that your human opponents may not, that they may even contrive to send the Zuma against you, just like Terrence did, and he is only one of several examples of this happening. The very power of the Zuma (and their incredible penchant for immediately overreacting to even unproven allegations) begs them to be manipulated by daring, reckless, or otherwise overconfident players, and therefore provides a sort of publicly available nuclear option for anyone desperate or crazy enough to not mind the risk of provoking them for the chance that they'll take someone (or something) out.

They overshadow all of the normal politics and intrigue that occur in the southwest. Now that they've proven that they won't limit themselves to such an area, they must be considered in the actions of anyone on the western half of the continent. It's like trying to have a gunfight in the same room as tank full of volatile explosives. You end up being more cautious than you otherwise would so as to avoid blowing yourself up. Its very presence automatically limits what you can or will do when pursuing conflicts against your enemies, be they military, religious or political. I have no problem with the Zuma GM. I will not, as others have, argue that they have been irrational, inconsistent, or otherwise badly played. I will say that I think Dwilight would be more interesting without them. I personally believe that the restrictive effect they have on human conflict of all sorts outweighs in a negative sense any positive contribution that they make in terms of providing an RP experience to that limited number of players that seeks to deal with them directly. That's why I don't like them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 03:03:18 AM
I believe they should be like us, if they want to play on Dwilight they should be like an aboriginal populace that through either our or their actions survive. They should play by the same rules. So far I see the Zuma as the nuclear option and they have totally changed the nature and balance of Dwilight. From this day forward the human kingdoms cannot afford to fight eachother, our best chance is to meld into massive stagnant powerblocs, because god forbid the GM's with unlimited power destroy everything we as players have worked hard for.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 08, 2012, 03:15:27 AM
I believe they should be like us, if they want to play on Dwilight they should be like an aboriginal populace that through either our or their actions survive. They should play by the same rules. So far I see the Zuma as the nuclear option and they have totally changed the nature and balance of Dwilight. From this day forward the human kingdoms cannot afford to fight eachother, our best chance is to meld into massive stagnant powerblocs, because god forbid the GM's with unlimited power destroy everything we as players have worked hard for.

The Zuma have been here for YEARS. There is no sudden need to act differently.

Also the GM's don't and have never had unlimited powers. They have game mechanics that control how they can recruit, how much they can recruit and the like. The rules are different, that leads to different strengths and weakness. Besides which, other players can destroy everything you have worked so hard for, look at Caerwyn, it doesn't take a GM.

I don't like the Zuma. Dwilight was not advertised as an island with NPC presence, a la Beluaterra, so their presence can correctly be said to be a surprise that was sprung on the players without their input or any chance to decline their presence ahead of time.

The essence of Vellos' argument should not be construed as an attack on the Zuma GM. The essence of the argument is that the very presence of an NPC faction of unknowable and quite possibly (effectively) unlimited power does by it's very nature warp the player to player interaction that would otherwise be taking place and that, normally, forms the essence of Battlemaster. Like a black hole, their existence is a plot sink. All other plots in its vicinity are inexorably drawn to it. You can't really afford to ignore them, because maybe somebody else won't. Your every action must be carefully considered in light of what effect it might have on the Zuma. Your every plan must take into account what might happen if the Zuma suddenly wake up and decide to interfere with you. The argument that the Zuma respond only to player stimulus doesn't matter, because even if you assiduously avoid provoking them, you must always take into account the possibility that your human opponents may not, that they may even contrive to send the Zuma against you, just like Terrence did, and he is only one of several examples of this happening. The very power of the Zuma (and their incredible penchant for immediately overreacting to even unproven allegations) begs them to be manipulated by daring, reckless, or otherwise overconfident players, and therefore provides a sort of publicly available nuclear option for anyone desperate or crazy enough to not mind the risk of provoking them for the chance that they'll take someone (or something) out.


Arguably there mere existence means they are MEANT to change what you consider the "essence" of BM. After all this is Dwilight, the whole island was created to be something other then the standard BM game. The fact that the Zuma are player driven is entirely relevant. Terrance has been able to have the effect he has, because the realms surrounding the Zuma have never managed to build a relationship with them that would have prevented it.

So many people are so scared of offending them, that you all leave yourselves open to someone willing to risk it all. Would the Zuma have acted as they did if they had an established relationship with Terran that would have given them pause in believing Terrance's forgery? No single players interaction with the Zuma happens in isolation.

Has anyone really stopped to think that maybe in Toms plans, the Zuma ARE Dwilight and form a integral part of its existence? Perhaps you were never meant to have the option to decline them, its not like you get to pick and choose every aspect of this game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 03:39:48 AM
Asylon has peace with the Zuma, they had land treaties with the Zuma, we have had long trade with the Zuma, we have had several ambassadors even a religion regarding the Zuma, does all that matter when one of our regions decides to flip over to the Zuma and we ask for it back, no because the Zumans have no regard for the relations that we the player have tried to build up for a long time. I cannot speak for the other realms , but basically Asylon had a poker shovd up its ass by the Zuma and we have been one of the more hospitable and trying to understand our southern neighbor, basically who cares... It doesn't matter what you do, they will do whatever they want. Because we are weak.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 08, 2012, 03:44:40 AM
Asylon has peace with the Zuma, they had land treaties with the Zuma, we have had long trade with the Zuma, we have had several ambassadors even a religion regarding the Zuma, does all that matter when one of our regions decides to flip over to the Zuma and we ask for it back, no because the Zumans have no regard for the relations that we the player have tried to build up for a long time. I cannot speak for the other realms , but basically Asylon had a poker shovd up its ass by the Zuma and we have been one of the more hospitable and trying to understand our southern neighbor, basically who cares... It doesn't matter what you do, they will do whatever they want. Because we are weak.

They do actually, but again you are looking at things from a HUMAN NOBLE perspective. Zuma think differently and as such the way they handle relationships are different. For all you know, the fact that nobody is even WILLING to stand up to them might be the problem. They might only respect entities that show they have a pair.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 03:53:07 AM
If you stand up to them they call you 'arrogant' and then do whatever they want anyways. When our land issue came about I came out guns blazing as any king would in defense of his land, and was basically told 'you are arrogant, shutup we love the Ambassador deal with him whether you like it or not we are the Zuma we don't value any treaties with humans blah blah" So then why string us along signing treaties and roleplaying with us. And then turning around and saying 'yeah yeah whatever we are the Zuma, you humans can't possibly understand how big pricks we are' then DONT interact with us, dont sign treaties and don't RP with us. Because basically it comes down to having to go through some weird test where the rules keep changing and there is only a few people who know the rules and they can change them whenever they want.  If I knew that by interacting with the Zuma and trying to build a relation with them would be the same as if I lived in  Luria Nova and never heard of the Zuma before , I would not have ever dealt with the Zuma like we did.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 08, 2012, 03:55:25 AM
Asylon has peace with the Zuma, they had land treaties with the Zuma, we have had long trade with the Zuma, we have had several ambassadors even a religion regarding the Zuma, does all that matter when one of our regions decides to flip over to the Zuma and we ask for it back, no because the Zumans have no regard for the relations that we the player have tried to build up for a long time.
Have you figured out why the Zuma violated your border treaty? Have you asked them this, or demanded that they hold to their agreement? Why won't they hand back the region? Have you tried to figure out why? Have you asked them if they intend to keep it? I asked you all this IG, and didn't ever get an answer.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on January 08, 2012, 04:16:07 AM
Typically the point at which a GM is saying 'oh, you don't know how hard it is to be a GM' is the point where they should stop being a GM.

One thing that GM-driven events are (or at least can be) good for is battling stagnation, and that is a problem in lots of BM realms - players get Ducal seats and then just park there, and in low-population realms there isn't enough population to have popular support for opposition.

The trouble is that the thing that makes BM fun is the organic interaction of lots of nobles with different and sometimes overlapping agendas. One or even several GMs can't really replicate this very easily. I've left BM a couple times and the thing that's keeping me here now is that I decided that I no longer care what happens to my characters - they're going to get into trouble and stir things up because really, why else am I playing? I've played rulers and Dukes and Judges and had my fun there, and now that I've made my mission to be a gadfly, I'm having a lot more fun.

Sorry that's a little OT. I do think that it is a fair question to ask 'how would you have done Dwilight,' because BM was a different place when Dwilight was made. If I were making it today, I'd make it smaller, lift the 1 character restriction, and enforce SMA as was originally intended. A lot of the code development has been great.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 08, 2012, 04:25:57 AM
Typically the point at which a GM is saying 'oh, you don't know how hard it is to be a GM' is the point where they should stop being a GM.

One thing that GM-driven events are (or at least can be) good for is battling stagnation, and that is a problem in lots of BM realms - players get Ducal seats and then just park there, and in low-population realms there isn't enough population to have popular support for opposition.

The trouble is that the thing that makes BM fun is the organic interaction of lots of nobles with different and sometimes overlapping agendas. One or even several GMs can't really replicate this very easily. I've left BM a couple times and the thing that's keeping me here now is that I decided that I no longer care what happens to my characters - they're going to get into trouble and stir things up because really, why else am I playing? I've played rulers and Dukes and Judges and had my fun there, and now that I've made my mission to be a gadfly, I'm having a lot more fun.

Sorry that's a little OT. I do think that it is a fair question to ask 'how would you have done Dwilight,' because BM was a different place when Dwilight was made. If I were making it today, I'd make it smaller, lift the 1 character restriction, and enforce SMA as was originally intended. A lot of the code development has been great.

Good thing that isn't what the GM is saying, just what some players are saying in his defense. The GM still has organic interaction with multiple nobles, but instead of it being internal to the realm, its all external. All those little agenda's across Dwilight are driving the GM and the Zuma in general.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 04:29:23 AM
Have you figured out why the Zuma violated your border treaty? Have you asked them this, or demanded that they hold to their agreement? Why won't they hand back the region? Have you tried to figure out why? Have you asked them if they intend to keep it? I asked you all this IG, and didn't ever get an answer.

You havent gotten an answer because we havent gotten an answer.  And thats the thing I don't have time to live on Zuma lands asking questions every day, I have a kingdom to run that is constantly under attack by monsters, we lost a region because of those same monster attacks after we spent weeks down there trying to save the region. If I had known the Zumans would not abide by treaties and negotiations I would have had the southern region filled to the brim with troops.

What really annoys me is not so much losing the region, that happens all the time, but it was basically being told that all of the treaties and negotiations meant !@#$ because we nobles dont understand the Zuma, then whats the use for roleplay with the Zuma anymore.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Solari on January 08, 2012, 04:37:36 AM
Has it occurred to any of you that the Zuma aren't aiming for Asylon, but instead passing through?  When a bus comes hurtling down the road and you happen to be in the way, it's not as though your skull was the destination.  It's going to keep on rolling.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 04:46:01 AM
I am wrong. Shutting up and going away.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 08, 2012, 10:19:36 AM
Terrance has been able to have the effect he has, because the realms surrounding the Zuma have never managed to build a relationship with them that would have prevented it.

What is the effect Terrence (my character) had, out of curiosity? I saw Zuma declare war on Terran and raid a region, I caught wind of that ultimatum Garret sent to SA, but not much more than that. As I only have a commoner on Dwilight, I don't often hear much of what goes on.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 08, 2012, 10:22:45 AM
What is the effect Terrence (my character) had, out of curiosity? I saw Zuma declare war on Terran and raid a region, I caught wind of that ultimatum Garret sent to SA, but not much more than that. As I only have a commoner on Dwilight, I don't often hear much of what goes on.

That pretty much sums it up. There have also been accusations leveled at Pian En Luries noble now. But it is getting to the point where it is wheels upon wheels, and what can directly be attributed to Terrance is becoming rather blurred. I don't know if the Zuma are acting on the Ultimatum to the SA, that would certainly be interesting.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 01:35:34 PM
Too much credit given to a mere human regarding the SA thing.

The more significant results of Terrence was what was found in his letters, the accusation he leveled at Allison (Hey, all the rulers know about it by now, so it's no secret), and other stuff that came about secondary to...ah crap human politics is confusing.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 08, 2012, 02:19:28 PM
That pretty much sums it up. There have also been accusations leveled at Pian En Luries noble now. But it is getting to the point where it is wheels upon wheels, and what can directly be attributed to Terrance is becoming rather blurred. I don't know if the Zuma are acting on the Ultimatum to the SA, that would certainly be interesting.
FangFang and his troops of Mini FangFangs are up in the Mountain of Betrayal, headed in the general direction of Gaston on some sort of hunting trip.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 08, 2012, 02:26:58 PM
Mini FangFangs

That's adorable.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Shizzle on January 08, 2012, 02:50:03 PM
That's adorable.

Even within a low-fantasy environment, I find names as FangFang rather ...rediculous. They wouldn't suit on BT, let alone on an SMA island, where we aspire to take things more seriously?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 04:05:22 PM
Dunno what *you* would call a...dragon...(?)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 08, 2012, 04:10:10 PM
Arguably there mere existence means they are MEANT to change what you consider the "essence" of BM. After all this is Dwilight, the whole island was created to be something other then the standard BM game. The fact that the Zuma are player driven is entirely relevant. Terrance has been able to have the effect he has, because the realms surrounding the Zuma have never managed to build a relationship with them that would have prevented it.

So many people are so scared of offending them, that you all leave yourselves open to someone willing to risk it all. Would the Zuma have acted as they did if they had an established relationship with Terran that would have given them pause in believing Terrance's forgery? No single players interaction with the Zuma happens in isolation.

Has anyone really stopped to think that maybe in Toms plans, the Zuma ARE Dwilight and form a integral part of its existence? Perhaps you were never meant to have the option to decline them, its not like you get to pick and choose every aspect of this game.

All of which is irrelevant to the point I'm making. That point is, again, that the very presence of the Zuma stifles and limits player versus player conflict and plot development in the southwest. The argument that the Zuma react only to player stimulus would be relevant if I was arguing that they are inconsistent, unpredictable or otherwise arbitrary in their actions, but I'm not. I'm saying that it doesn't matter what they're doing or why they're doing it, the mere fact of their presence creates a plot sink.

Also, regarding player evaluations of what it's like dealing with the Zuma and whether doing so is fun and interesting or not, I am far more inclined to give weight to the opinions of the people who, by dint of proximity, are subjected to the limiting factors they create. Therefore what people like Chenier, Vellos and Glaumring have to say, who have all actually had to deal with the presence of the Zuma day in and day out for years, takes on a bit more weight in my mind than the opinion of someone who thinks the idea of the Zuma is really cool but hasn't ever had to deal with them consistently in game. Apart from Artemesia, I don't think I've heard anything good about the Zuma from anyone who plays in Terran, D'Hara, Barca, or Asylon. Shouldn't that say something?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 04:34:17 PM
I really don't want to be the bad guy and cite rules, but here's the deal, which has in fact been stated on the wiki by Tom.

You do not have the right to play where you want.

You don't like how there's a supposed "plot sink" in close proximity to the Zuma? Dude, open your eyes (unless you're blind, in which case BM accomodates for that) and look at the Dwilight map. Are you looking? Look at it! It's HUGE! Like, seriously, are you saying you cannot find one single place on that HUGE area of land that you can play in? Blah blah about IC sense and such. Ok, so your current character is stuck there. You're not forced to play that guy. But even so, you still do not have the right to play where you want. You feel like staying in Terran/Asylon/Barca/D'Hara? That's your CHOICE. No one says you have to, furthermore, it is even said that you do not have the right to. So if you don't like it, then leave. No one is obligated to keep you there, and while there are efforts to make it fun, if you are convinced that it's not enough, then go look for better places where you can satisfy your high standards of "fun".

And the next point: If you think ALL of Dwilight can be so affected by the Zuma that your entire Dwilight experience is ruined...Well, got some new for you: You ain't entitled to Dwilight anyway. So if you don't like the continent, then go play somewhere else. You're part of something bigger than yourself. There will be people like you who will complain, who don't like what's happening. There will also be people who like what's happening. There will be people who don't care either way. There are a LOT of different players, and the result is, if YOU don't like it, then get a bunch of similar people and do something useful about it (Forum bitching isn't considered useful generally, I'd know lololol). Otherwise, just play like the rest of us. Or, if you think it's really so bad, then just leave the continent. There are six continents, and only two of them have any GM-controlled NPCs currently. You have 4 continents to choose from, and the maximum number of characters anyone can have is 5, with the maximum characters in a single continent 2 (Except a weird case which I won't get into here). So that means if you really really really hate Dwilight and really really don't like daimons, then even if you donated (Which would also suggest that you don't hate the game itself) then you'd have at most 5 characters to split among your choice of AT, EC, Col, and FEI. And those continents most certainly do not have any "superpowerful daimons". If you fail there, then that's purely your failure.

And thus, the conclusion is very simple: You think you can't deal with it? Then leave.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 04:40:21 PM
So why didnt Terran Barca and Asylon get to choose like Morek Madina an the luries? Can we get a dev to move our kingdoms to the. Safe east continent so we can actually play the game?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on January 08, 2012, 04:42:24 PM
I thought the point of this thread was simply to have players express their opinions about the Zuma. I don't see any harm in that, and I've learned quite a bit from several of the criticisms and some of the defense.

I don't see anybody claiming 'I donated, I demand that we get rid of the Zuma' and I don't see any reason for the consistent ad hominem attacks you are making. You are speaking as though you have some kind of special authority or understanding of the rules. As far as I can tell, you are a not even especially old player who feels entitled to troll the forum because you don't like some of the other players.

I've always enjoyed the realms I've been in with guys like Lyman and the Apasurian player whose name escapes me, but your collective contribution to BM appears to be the proverbial poop in the pool, both in game and out. What on earth do you get out of it?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 04:43:31 PM
lol, no one told you to colonize those regions. You did that of your own accord. The original four (well, technically 6, including the Zuma and rogue) were just because, you know, you have to start somewhere. And none of them were anywhere near the Zuma. The closest, Madina, would still have about a week one way. And remember the beginning of Dwilight, there was a freaking black fog over the western lands.

No, you guys CHOSE, on your own, of your own free will, to settle in the west. No one said you had to. No one forced you to. Now that you find that maybe you don't like the consequences of your own decisions, you attempt to escape. That's quite childish and stupid. You are where you are due to the actions and decisions made by your fellow human players. Accept that fact first and foremost.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 04:45:27 PM
Im the Apasurian....
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 04:48:49 PM
I thought the point of this thread was simply to have players express their opinions about the Zuma. I don't see any harm in that, and I've learned quite a bit from several of the criticisms and some of the defense.

I don't see anybody claiming 'I donated, I demand that we get rid of the Zuma' and I don't see any reason for the consistent ad hominem attacks you are making. You are speaking as though you have some kind of special authority or understanding of the rules. As far as I can tell, you are a not even especially old player who feels entitled to troll the forum because you don't like some of the other players.

I've always enjoyed the realms I've been in with guys like Lyman and the Apasurian player whose name escapes me, but your collective contribution to BM appears to be the proverbial poop in the pool, both in game and out. What on earth do you get out of it?

le sigh? If you don't believe me, then you can just ask about the whole "Right to play where you want" deal.

And I couldn't care less what you think of me. Have I ever? Should be evident from my posts. Occasionally I will take a stance as strong as the ones some people take. It's er, how you say..."lolworthy"?

Besides, I'm not always wrong, and not everything I post has absolutely no value. The way I present them, now there, sure. But hey, I'm hardly the worst of the bunch.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on January 08, 2012, 04:52:28 PM
I guess my point is that I don't see anyone other than you talking about 'rights to play where you want' or anything like it. All you are doing is bludgeoning some of BM's best players over the head with rules they already know and aren't complaining about as if you were a parent explaining them to a child.

It isn't that I don't believe you. It's that what you're saying isn't relevant and the tone you're using isn't appropriate for BM noobs, much less some of the oldest and best players left around after all these years. You aren't 'taking a stand,' you're just being a jerk and muddying what should and could be a useful discussion of the role of GM plots in the game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 04:58:54 PM
Its because he has a good thing going and doesnt want his power busted up. He is the voice of the most powerful army on Dwilight. And he didnt have to fight tooth and claw for the realm he now lives in. Because he was booted from the human player realms.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 04:59:26 PM
The relevance only comes when people persist in saying stuff like how they shouldn't have to deal with inconvenient stuff that is close to their realms, when said inconveniences have existed long before they ever got there, and no one told them that they had to go there.

To me, that's like someone seeing a house built on a faultline, refusing to buy insurance, and later crying about how their house got destroyed in an earthquake.

Or it's like someone reading the Surgeon General's warning that cigarettes cause cancer, then lighting up three packs a day for twenty years, then complaining about how he has lung cancer.

Or it's like a pregnant lady who decides to down some apple martinis and later complains that her kid has a messed up face.

The straight up facts were all there since the very beginning. In choosing to do what you did anyway, you inherently accept responsibility for the consequences of your choices.

The way I'm seeing it right now, some people just can't seem to accept responsibility. And that IS childlike.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on January 08, 2012, 05:01:47 PM
Okay, I get it. Maybe you're right that players are just griping because their characters and their characters' realms are having a hard time.  I do play in Terran but I haven't been there long and don't have a stake in it as a player. You know more than I do about that side of things.

That's still not license to be a jerk about it, so please either find a way to express what you are saying like a decent human being, or don't post.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 05:06:19 PM
Okay, I get it. Maybe you're right that players are just griping because their characters and their characters' realms are having a hard time.  I do play in Terran but I haven't been there long and don't have a stake in it as a player. You know more than I do about that side of things.

That's still not license to be a jerk about it, so please either find a way to express what you are saying like a decent human being, or don't post.

Doesn't stop other people. Treat others like...meh, golden rule #3.

I don't care to take !@#$, and I will dish out what I care to. Spew poo poo, expect poo poo back. Yeah, it's definitely not nice most of the time. You may have noticed that my tone progressively got a lot more volatile following a subtle trend in the thread in general. I just happen to be a lot more flammable sometimes.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 05:10:16 PM
Basically it comes down to this, we were happy with the Zuma being a benign force that was in its lands and we could interact with them as we chose, lately the Zuma have become the only voice in the west and its GM led and its ran by one guy as the Ambassador, now thats fine. It was great the Zuma said they wanted certain lands and we all agreed that we would set up our kingdoms there and wouldnt cross the line into Zuma lands and take land. As far as I know know no one intentionally crossed the line. Like Barca had no clue that Eregon was linked to the Zuman lands. No one knew and now all of a sudden the Zuma are pissed about all these kingdoms that long ago all agreed would not cross the green line. None of which did. And now the Zuma are taking land and breaking treaties, because well "we just dont understand the Zuma cuz we're dumb humans" . It seems as if the Zuman rules changed lately, it seems as if whatever they were originally meant to be has been twisted and now we are finding out that the players in Dwilight have and always had to take a backseat to the Zuma, because they were here first. So is Dwilight a place that cultivates PVP and player to player interactions or is it merely a map set up for the Gm's and the player was an after thought? Should we have left the west continent and played merely on the east or just stayed in Bel where we knew the rules of the game?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:12:57 PM
FWIW - This is incorrect. They cannot, and did not do this. They merely slipped by you without anyone noticing the actual path they took.

But Hireshmont claimed IC that they flew over the river, and Brance believes him, because he doesn't know that the Zuma can't do that.

Really? That's weird. Because neither we nor Asylon got any reports of "enemy troops are entering your region." Did they region hop... like, 3 regions?

They can hop rivers if they're like Beluaterra daimons.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on January 08, 2012, 05:15:36 PM
Really? That's weird. Because neither we nor Asylon got any reports of "enemy troops are entering your region." Did they region hop... like, 3 regions?

No.

Quote
They can hop rivers if they're like Beluaterra daimons.

No, they can't.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:16:58 PM
BM is largely player driven, and from my point of view, which due to circumstances and OOC relationships I have with some of the players of characters that HAVE managed to pierce some of the Zuma puzzle is perhaps better informed then most,

Does it not bother you that your satisfaction with the Zuma is apparently at least partially based on privileged OOC knowledge you gained by long-term friendships with other players that not all players have access to? That would bother me.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 05:19:04 PM
Then how? Our entire army was in Vakreno fighting monsters, if the Daimons marched there it would have been wonderful to have the help, hell they could have cleared out a long line of 3000cs hordes from Kosht all the way up to Itaufield and put us ahead several months. My other guess is that perhaps Terran missed them entering 2 of their regions... And or the Daimons can tunnel under the lake and into rogue regions?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 05:22:14 PM
Would it make you guys feel better if I said that there is some sort of purpose to the Zuma, that I don't have a clue what it is, but that it shouldn't bother any of you?

Take for example, your mortality. Everyone dies one day. Does that bother everyone? Some are, some aren't. Most of us don't live every day of our lives thinking about it. Fine, the Zuma are a bit more obvious. Ok...Then a terminal cancer patient. Not all of them succumb to their disease and just give up on living. Some do. Fine, if you want to do something like that, go for it. You won't get sympathy from me (Since contrary to a real disease, anything bad that happens to you in a game...doesn't affect your real life. And if it does, do consider finding professional help.)

If it's really not fun, then I find it interesting that NO ONE among those who say it's not fun (I'm looking at you Vellos, Glaumring, mainly). have yet proposed exactly what they would do differently and just how that would make it more fun.

Remember, it's a GM-controlled NPC faction. You'll have to propose your superior vision of how to handle the Zuma with that in mind. You can't make it into a human realm. You can't make it so that you can't recruit daimons. Basically, the starting scenario is: You are a GM given powers to recruit daimons. Your "realm" is an NPC realm with associated mechanics. You must now deal with the players.

Have at it and present your ideas then and don't forget to explain just why each part is clearly guaranteed to be superior to the existing situation.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:26:13 PM
Y'all think you can do a better job? What, you mean talk a bunch to others?

Probably not. Because I don't know all the design details, I don't know how much of what I'm criticizing is the GM's behavior, Tom's design, or something else. I won't presume to know all the details.

Without revealing everything about how your faction works?

Yeah, because understanding that my opponent has to use gold to recruit practically guarantees I'm going to win a war with him.

Because you know, becoming a GM usually means you have a !@#$ton more restrictions than ever before, and I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to just out and say what you're here for. In fact I'm fairly certain the Zuma GM is not supposed to overtly state what the Zuma's purpose is.

Sounds plausible and reasonable. So maybe I'm not criticizing the GM, ultimately, but Tom.

And y'all can BS all you want right now about how you wouldn't think about roflstomping other realms.

No, I would totally rotflstomp every realm near the Zuma. And I would demand their absolute subservience, and launch my own crusades against any entity that criticized daimonic rule, and require that ambassadors come to meet me in my capital and take up residence there. I might demand concubines as well.

But I would be clear: I'm not doing this because of some mysterious purpose. I am doing this because I am powerful, you are not, and I live in a !@#$ing volcano. And I would be careful to overextend myself and leave plenty of vulnerabilities, and make lots of enemies, and alienate lots of people. In a sense, Arcane, in Vlaanderen, comes to mind.

This is why it's probably good I'm not a GM: and also why I don't think the Zuma should be on Dwilight. Because the reasonable course of action for the GM is one that is obviously not in keeping with what almost everyone perceives Dwilight to be about.

It would piss off a lot of people, but there's really nothing I know that's stopping him. That said, you really think you wouldn't ever be tempted to go rage?

If I knew why? Nah, I wouldn't be that upset. Go somewhere else, start over on a new continent. Losing doesn't bother me. I'd be fine with the Invasion succeeding on Beluaterra too; I kind of actually groan a bit whenever I hear there's a chance for victory.

Remember, it's a GM-controlled NPC faction. You'll have to propose your superior vision of how to handle the Zuma with that in mind. You can't make it into a human realm. You can't make it so that you can't recruit daimons. Basically, the starting scenario is: You are a GM given powers to recruit daimons. Your "realm" is an NPC realm with associated mechanics. You must now deal with the players.

That's bullcrap. I don't have to suggest a better GM-controlled NPC faction. I don't think there should be any GM-controlled NPC faction at all. If you want me to come up with stories of how the Zuma could be "wound down" so it's not just a "Poof! They're gone" type thing I can take a shot. But I don't think there should be a GM faction.

And besides, you're just changing the topic to get out of a hard spot.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:28:54 PM
They do actually, but again you are looking at things from a HUMAN NOBLE perspective.

Which, for BM, is the one, the only, the exclusively acceptable perspective, unless you are playing a commoner.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:31:09 PM
Has it occurred to any of you that the Zuma aren't aiming for Asylon, but instead passing through?  When a bus comes hurtling down the road and you happen to be in the way, it's not as though your skull was the destination.  It's going to keep on rolling.

I'm sure that's a great comfort to Asylon's players.

"No, Asylon, we're not even aiming for you. We don't even care about you. We just need to destroy you to get on with another part of our plot."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 05:32:31 PM
How can we propose changes without actually knowing anything about how the Daimons recruit or maintain huge armies in crappy land? Or how they travel or how many different Gm's control the Zuma? None of these questions would arise if the Daimons played by the same rules we do.

Here is my opinion, the Daimons are buying food to feed the human population and then they eat the humans and for some reason for every humans eaten they can recruit 10000cs. So basically if they humans around them want to do anything about the Zumans, they stop selling them food, oh but look they the Zumans still have thousands of humans to eat with the potential of gaining CS from each human, they already have a huge army so they just invade the lands around them with their massive armies gaining more CS from the humans they eat. Which brings me to the conclusion, whay cant we develop the same way to recruit as the Daimons?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:35:25 PM
The relevance only comes when people persist in saying stuff like how they shouldn't have to deal with inconvenient stuff that is close to their realms, when said inconveniences have existed long before they ever got there, and no one told them that they had to go there.

Oh yeah, they've existed a long time. Yeah, Vates has been around forever; Haktoo has always been the Zuma ruler.

Oh wait.

And besides, I'm not saying we shouldn't have to deal with inconveniences. The Zuma are there. We will find a way to deal with them. The continent on the whole would be better if we didn't have to.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 05:36:42 PM
Perhaps a new Zuman tribe could arise in Balance retreat just below Morek and inbetween Pian en Luries land?!?! That would be awesome!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:37:48 PM
No, they can't.

That's very odd.

You mean Zuma can't hop rivers, or daimons in general can't hop rivers? Because I'm almost 100% confident that it was observed a few times in Beluaterra during the last invasion.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 05:38:43 PM
Multi-post FTW!

Sorry; this is what happens when you're 3 pages behind on a thread that you feel passionately about.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on January 08, 2012, 05:41:16 PM
That's very odd.

You mean Zuma can't hop rivers, or daimons in general can't hop rivers? Because I'm almost 100% confident that it was observed a few times in Beluaterra during the last invasion.

Daimons cannot hop rivers.

There was once a special form of travel allowed for GMs. It was disabled during the fourth invasion, and even before then, it wasn't what most people thought.

Daimons (and any other GM-controlled troops) now travel exactly the same way as anyone else.

If you don't see them coming, then it is necessarily because you did not look in the right place
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 05:48:22 PM
So they managed to dress as humans and walked through Vassar , Shoka and Inklen without the Terrans seeing a massive 8000cs horde wander through their neutral lands?

Did they dress as Pilgrims? Or were they dressed as 8000 SA priests as they made their way northward lol

Ok Ok I understand we are just dumb humans should figure it out.. Oh I know they were invisible! They all turned invisible and walked unseen through 3 regions of Terran or better yet From Aspar to Echuirfield to Vakreno heaps and then to Lowervia and then into the Barrowpeaks and then headed north dressed as peasants.

Maybe they used Daimon bushes and just tied entire trees to their bodies and and acted like a huge moving forest and no one in Terran or Asylon noticed a giant forest moving through their lands...

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 05:49:18 PM
Then if you can't do a better job, sure, go ahead and explain how you'd make it plausible and not totally out of nowhere for the Zuma and daimons to leave. You can't just say they never existed. They are there as part of Dwilight. Now deal with that, and move forward with how you think they should have worked.

A tough spot? Rather, the burden is on you to say how it should have been. I am content to stay with what already exists.

And as some reveal that is a bit anti-climactic, I once asked Tom what would happen if a human became ruler of the Zuma Coalition, and he told me he'd change it to a human realm. Not sure how that would even make a difference, since the one human there doesn't care to do that (No duh, I'd rather sit around and watch daimons fly around than be ruler of pretty much the first realm to get revenge-stomped once the daimons go bye-bye), but I guess there's no harm in telling you that now.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 06:00:54 PM
Then if you can't do a better job, sure, go ahead and explain how you'd make it plausible and not totally out of nowhere for the Zuma and daimons to leave. You can't just say they never existed. They are there as part of Dwilight. Now deal with that, and move forward with how you think they should have worked.

A tough spot? Rather, the burden is on you to say how it should have been. I am content to stay with what already exists.

And as some reveal that is a bit anti-climactic, I once asked Tom what would happen if a human became ruler of the Zuma Coalition, and he told me he'd change it to a human realm. Not sure how that would even make a difference, since the one human there doesn't care to do that (No duh, I'd rather sit around and watch daimons fly around than be ruler of pretty much the first realm to get revenge-stomped once the daimons go bye-bye), but I guess there's no harm in telling you that now.

We are not asking the Zumans to leave, we are asking for the Zumans to have clearly defined rules so that we all know what each side is at least capable of in the realm of fairness. I don't have to ask these questions of Astrum, or Luria Nova or Madina, I already know. Instead for the Daimons its always some ephemeral ever changing way that they can be and if we get close to finding out the whole reason changes, because there is probably no real defined rules about the Daimons. Come on we have been playing with the Zuma on Dwilight for a few years now, you think there would be one human  out of the bunch that saw how the Daimon get their food or manage to maintain huge armies that are not subject to any of the rules that human realms have to live by. Will the answer be revealed when Dwilight is a dead unpopulated map? Will the GM appear and say " Duh! you guys didn't know that the Zumans used sunlight to power their bodies? Like why didnt you just cover the sun lolz"
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 06:17:07 PM
You're still assuming that no human knows. And I'm not saying players, I mean actual characters, who are playing in human realms. I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least one human in a human realm who knows more or less the daimons' mechanics.

But even so, are you really going to go fight them? Even among humans, the general idea is that you see your ultimate secret plan succeed without anyone you don't want knowing anything about it. And at the very end, if you feel like it, you gloat. But only after your plan is completely seen through and done.

It's nothing unique to the daimons either. Let's not talk about mechanics for now, because I guarantee you if people were really intent on figuring that out they would have by now. Let's instead talk about the "Zuma plan".

Here's the deal Glaumring: An exchange. You tell me exactly what Asylon has ever planned and will plan, how their dealings with everyone else factors into the goals of the realm, and what they will do to ensure that occurs. Then I will ask the Zuma GM to reveal his side. Sound fair? Because that's really what you're trying to get at.

Yeah, yeah, mechanics you'll say. Does that REALLY make a difference? Do you think you're really meant to fight them? If so, then there'd be probably be more overt hostility from the daimons. The Zuma GM would probably have been running amok through your realms as we speak, possibly laughing maniacally like Overlord. But that has never happened. The reason could be that in the end, the mechanics are not so important.  If you really are supposed to know how they recruit, I'm sure such would be public information by now so we can all go prepare how to fight against daimons.

You know what I think is actually the problem? The faction is one that has mechanics that you don't know because you're not part of the Dev Team or NPC player. And it doesn't so much matter whether you can talk about it (Obviously Devs and current and former NPC players can't talk about it) so much as that you are bothered you don't know and you really want to know.

...You also don't know how the legendary hero criteria is determined. I'm pretty sure not many of you know how exactly the monster/undead mechanics work either. But that doesn't really bother you because you know that no one out there does have that knowledge except for the Dev Team who can't do anything about it anyway. You probably take issue with the fact not that the GM knows, but rather that he can use that to his advantage. And you don't like being at such a disadvantage.

It might be a mechanically enforced advantage, but is that really something so alien? Asylon versus Astrum. Guess who wins. And you have all the information you need (Or do you?) So you don't know everything about how the daimons work. Ok...And? Even if you knew about it (Like Astrum) would you win anyway (Like Astrum)?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Lorgan on January 08, 2012, 06:26:27 PM
Jeez, just go kill them already. I haven't heard of gigantic daimon armies on Dwilight.
The real frightening ones are on BT.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 06:35:27 PM
I think you are twisting what I mean to say into a "Im pissed because I can't beat the Zuma so I want the rules changed so I can beat them " type of thing. I am not on about that at all. I don't mind being the underdog, I have always been the underdog on Dwilight and tried to make almost impossible realms function, not because I want to win BM, but because I enjoy the character interactions and dynamics that evolve out of conflict and drama.

What I see lately with the Zuma is a stifling element and a bully like element that did not exist before. What I believed before was that we could learn from the Zuma, make treaties and evolve with them and have conflict and or RP with them. What I have now found out is that " We are all too dumb as humans to figure out the Zumans"  and the dynamic will constantly change so that the Zumans are always the top-dog and merely the GM's toys. The Zuma are not like us, they are not played like us, they do not have the same rules as us, they do not eat like us, they dont look like us, they do not travel like us... The Zuma do not exist, so remove them from the map and come up with a better more fleshed out version of them  that actually has interesting culture and weaknesses and and drive that is at least within reason and not some dumb Chinese puzzle-box. The feeling I get is like this kids play war, one kid shoots another kid and the kid says " Naw naw you didnt shoot me, cuz I am the Zuma, Zuma are so strong and they cant get hit by bullets, they dont have to play by your rules, Zuma have own rules, you dont like move somewhere safer"
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 08, 2012, 06:40:27 PM
We are not asking the Zumans to leave, we are asking for the Zumans to have clearly defined rules so that we all know what each side is at least capable of in the realm of fairness. I don't have to ask these questions of Astrum, or Luria Nova or Madina, I already know. Instead for the Daimons its always some ephemeral ever changing way that they can be and if we get close to finding out the whole reason changes, because there is probably no real defined rules about the Daimons. Come on we have been playing with the Zuma on Dwilight for a few years now, you think there would be one human  out of the bunch that saw how the Daimon get their food or manage to maintain huge armies that are not subject to any of the rules that human realms have to live by. Will the answer be revealed when Dwilight is a dead unpopulated map? Will the GM appear and say " Duh! you guys didn't know that the Zumans used sunlight to power their bodies? Like why didnt you just cover the sun lolz"

While I understand your frustration, it's been made very clear many times that all NPC factions *do* have rules that they must operate under; they are just different from ours. And I will be very surprised if we are ever allowed to know exactly what those rules are. I think in a larger sense it is simply frustrating having to deal with an NPC faction that is overwhelmingly powerful and therefore cannot be held accountable. Sure, sure, they do everything for a reason. That doesn't necessarily mean that those reasons are in any way under MY control. In the grossest sense I can limit myself and make sure that I don't do anything to intentionally piss them off, but I can't control what other people do. I CAN, however, end up paying the price for what other people do, and that's quite galling, especially since I can't really do anything about it; the Zuma are simply too powerful to resist.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 06:44:35 PM
There are different results for different approaches you know. That's also why there are some people who are staying silent because not only did they apparently know how to get stuff from the daimons, they also are cunning enough to keep their advantages to themselves. If anyone, blame your fellow players who don't want to tell you what they know, because they're not under obligations not to tell you. They just feel like not telling you.

Anyway, if you really ask around you will find players who have had truly worthwhile interactions and got a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if someone out there among you has pieced together the "secret of Dwilight" already, and either doesn't want to speak up, or has done so and was dismissed as insignificant and/or crazy.

I don't think Dwilight will end up like past Invasions where they run their course and end, and we are still none the wiser. I have a hunch that if and when the Zuma's real purpose gets revealed, we will all know very clearly what their purpose is. It might not be anytime soon, and it might not be when we would like, but that's really how things go.

For a real world analogy, how much do you think you know about your country's secrets?

And finally, you know, Glaumring, you should really understand by now that your character's reaction to the situation in Kosht that seemingly pushed you over the edge, while understandable in human terms, was really not doing you any favors in the minds of beings that view humans as more or less insects. Like, what would you do if an ant said you took away its anthill when you moved into your new house? Probably take out the bug spray and kill that ant and all its kin, then wipe out the anthill. You seem not to care about that at all, or if you do, you seem to be convinced that such is the wrong perspective.

And for what Geronus wrote: You also can't control what people do with other human realms. Do you think you can control any more what someone with a grudge against you sends to, say, SA? And do you think you'd survive any better if SA crusades against you? Everguard, Thulsoma, Averoth, and Caerwyn have proven that no, you do not stand a chance of surviving. Who knows how much those events were influenced via human manipulation as well.

Human manipulation is everywhere. And everywhere there will be some power to manipulate. That's the name of the game for those manipulators. After all, if there wasn't some power that can be used against one's enemies, say, a weak power, why even bother? Only do it if it would actually work.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 06:44:54 PM
Then its final, the entire realm of Asylon is going to join the Zuma, we are going to march into the Zuman lands enmasse and all switch to the Zuman lands. You better open up some estates because we as the players have the same rights that Ambassador Garrett does, I suggest everyone in every realm just up and head over to the Zuman lands and join, we can be done with the problem right there, afterwards we can all return to our kingdoms and play as normal but we'll be called Zumans instead of Humans. There problem solved and there would be no reason any longer for this issue of Zuman interference in the game play... I hope you like company Ambassador, the Zuman lands are going to get rather crowded.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 06:53:43 PM
/me points you over to Tom's post in that estates thread about doing bad things to people who try what you just suggested, Glaumring.

^^I'm not just trolling about either.

If you are a lord near the Zuma, with the new estate system you can join their duchy! I am curious what would happen if someone died, but I wouldn't dare do it with my character.

I can tell you what would happen: I'd personally throw a lightning bolt. I explicitly said that the system is unfinished and to please not try and abuse it.

And to hammer the important point home: There isn't a thing the Zuma can do that the humans cannot also achieve. Yeah they have powerful units. You know what though? The pen's mightier than the sword, the faith is mightier than the inferno.

If and when someone like Allison decides she wants to !@#$ your realm up because she wants your land, do you think you'll stand any better chance? Caerwyn has proven that the answer is "No". She'll get what she wants because she has freaking power. And power is not only limited to CS. Come on, you all know this already. And I'm not trying to be patronizing. It's true, you're forgetting that the ONLY real advantage the daimons have over you is in CS right now.

Let me make some stuff clear since some of you aren't thinking outside the box.

The daimons do not have a religion. OMG, big huge revelation. And if you can't appreciate how significant this is, then too bad.

The daimons are limited to themselves in that one area. Again, you figure out just how significant this is. Hint: Alliances matter at times.

And very importantly, the daimons are inherently not as trusted as other humans. Come on people.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 07:07:52 PM
We want to join the Zuma too, you did it why can't we? Asylon is going to join the Zumans. Why can't we? So its special club that only one player can join, with a collection of players that are Dev's ingame who understand the mechanics of the Daimons etc , and the rest of us have to sit on the outside and just take it. I see you marching around in Kosht, I see vacant estates in Kosht. Why can't we just move in?

Oh I know why, because it would mess up the game for you! Oh so sad so then you could make a thread called " Asylon/!@#$%^&s" and sit here and bitch about how big !@#$%^&s the Asylonians are and how they don't play by the rules, and then I'll say to you " Garrett, you just dont understand Asylonians, we are different than other humans, we think differently blah blah blah".

We are going to join the Zumans, rules be damned, Asylonians are different than other human realms, we are different than the Zumans we are beyond Tom and the Dev's control. We would rather die or be banned than to be slaves an play a lopsided game.

Actually I could even make a roleplay around it, I could say that little did Glaumring know but when he was a child a Daimon went to Port Raviel and had sex with his mom and guess what Glaumring is half-Daimon and he just wants to go home and be with the Daimons and his people and it took all this time to figure out that he was wrong and that he is a Daimon too! Its awesome we could do so much and you guys could tell the Asylonians the plans and stuff and we could march around with you guys kicking everyones ass, we could wipe out Kabrinskia is like 2 turns and then up to Astrum and because of my royal blood and being half-Daimon the Zuma could make me king of the entire western continent of Dwilight and you could be my Ambassador and then the east continent would get what it has coming for it.  It would be awesome, heck I'd even change my family name to Glaumring of the Zuma or something, because who is to stop me? I am Zuma and I play by different rules than the rest of Dwilight... If you can't beat them.... JOIN THEM!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 08, 2012, 07:11:13 PM
And now the Zuma are taking land and breaking treaties
Did you ever ask the Zuma why they broke the treaty? Did you ever consider the possibility that you broke the treaty first?

Quote
It seems as if the Zuman rules changed lately, it seems as if whatever they were originally meant to be has been twisted
How can you possibly claim that? You don't know what they were originally meant to be, nor do you know what they are now meant to be. So how can you possibly claim that their purpose has been twisted?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 08, 2012, 07:12:47 PM
Really?
Really.

Quote
Did they region hop... like, 3 regions?
No.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 07:23:10 PM
We are going to enmasse join the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 08:02:32 PM
Daimons cannot hop rivers.

There was once a special form of travel allowed for GMs. It was disabled during the fourth invasion, and even before then, it wasn't what most people thought.

Daimons (and any other GM-controlled troops) now travel exactly the same way as anyone else.

If you don't see them coming, then it is necessarily because you did not look in the right place

That makes sense then; explains the difference.

But... but... I still don't understand what happened. Do they just not cause "An enemy is approaching" messages to happen? I guess all of Asylon's lords could be coordinatedly lying to Terran. It's possible. I don't find it highly likely.

Hm. Now I'm wondering if maybe FangFang traveled without a unit somewhere, then recruited from rogues. I wonder if that's possible. Doesn't seem like it would be, but either Zuma have some kind of "stealth mode" where they don't trigger any of the normal warnings, or else Glaumring is actually something of a master conspirator. I am skeptical of Glaumring's conspiratorial skills, and thus am now wondering about the possibility of inviso-daimons.

Jeez, just go kill them already. I haven't heard of gigantic daimon armies on Dwilight.
The real frightening ones are on BT.

How's 50,000 CS sound?

And to hammer the important point home: There isn't a thing the Zuma can do that the humans cannot also achieve. Yeah they have powerful units. You know what though? The pen's mightier than the sword, the faith is mightier than the inferno.

Oh yeah, we could RTO all of the Zuma lands. What a great idea. Problem: they'll still have units. Maybe you missed the part about really, really big units.

No, faith is not mightier than the inferno. Religions don't give combat bonuses, as far as I am aware. Sure, maybe if something like the Light showed up, that would do something. And be absolutely idiotic: talk about making a Beluaterra-lite. It'd be all the frustration of the Fourth Invasion with none of the epic scale. And you cannot seriously be suggesting that I can write Haktoo enough letters that she will die of paper inundation.

Oh and alliances matter? Really? What extraordinary knowledge you bring. I would have thought that the Zuma could be everywhere with all of their CS all at once! Thank you for illuminating these mysteries to me.

Ooo, or maybe we should all go and convert the Zuma to our religion; maybe that's why the whole lore about the Zuma ordering the founding of two religions is significant. And when the Zuma is in our religion, our religion will have True Ultimate Power! It'll be like controlling a genie or something. Which will be awesome: then, all the strength of a GM can be wielded by religions, and the huge amount of player-created content can be rendered worthless by whichever religion happens to convert the (most) daimons. That would be SO much fun. Because everybody knows that religion on Dwilight is really, really lacking; it's got no flavor at all. Dwilight is really the continent that needs a shot in the arm in the religious game.

Not. In such a hypothetical, if SA "got" the daimons, we could kiss goodbye to anything else on the continent basically. Not because SA was so compelling, but because the combined strength just couldn't be resisted. If a smaller religion, maybe Triunism or Elrism for example, "got" the daimons: no matter how much RP has been put into SA, maybe we couldn't destroy'em but, damn, we could do some damage. Not because we were able to create an interesting and convincing religion that really stirred people up: but because we gained the favor of the GM by investing the most time in figuring out the plot. Which is kind of a lame way to structure power in a supposedly team-based and collaborative game.

Or maybe, oo, even more fun, maybe we should worship the daimons! Oh, how original! We could all become like the Zuma tribespeople themselves; have a sort of barbarian culture where we all dance around sacrificing the occasional goat. Sounds like boatloads of fun.

These are what I think of with maybe 30 seconds of mental effort. Maybe there's some even deeper and lamer plan. I am skeptical of the ability of any one or two people to come up with a more interesting world than all of us combined, and confident of their ability to seriously retard the efforts of players in investing in that world. Hence why I don't think there should be any Zuma. When the Zuma were simply a quiet, benign presence, not interfering much, not really doing anything, they were tolerable. The neighboring realms had good reason to feel secure: the Zuma had no significant track record for aggression. Only idiots got in trouble with the Zuma, and they mostly deserved it. When the Zuma responded to Barca's taking Eregon: that was pretty normal Zuma behavior. Could have been solved. But when things escalated into ever more elaborate demands, the series of forgeries, the various dubiously legitimate ultimatums, FangFang's northward march... not normal Zuma behavior. Externally, at least. Maybe the internal process is identical. I'm not the GM, I don't know, maybe he/she really is processing everything identically as before. But externally, it does not seem at all consistent with previous behavior. The end result is that realms in the area now have only two functional foreign policies: become implicit vassals (as the Zuma have effectively demanded of Terran and seem to be pushing for in Barca), or else try to do some lame "Unite Humanity! Avoid Conflict!" approach where we try to build a grand coalition. Normal politics stop.

I will have to think for a bit about possible winding-down stories for the Zuma. As much as it sounds like a lame cop-out, it is hard to know a good such story without knowing what was actually going on before or, for example, what the RPed explanation is behind Vates' leaving. In hindsight I wish I'd pursued more information about the transition from Vates to Haktoo. But, I'm more than happy to try and come up with reasonable means by which the Zuma could eventually be removed from Dwilight. Just might take a bit. I've never claimed I would be a better GM, and thus there is no real burden on me to demonstrate any such claim.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Telrunya on January 08, 2012, 08:06:56 PM
Quote
There problem solved and there would be no reason any longer for this issue of Zuman interference in the game play

I see the Zuma as part of the game. They aren't interfering in gameplay, for me, they are simply part of the gameplay. You don't have full control over gameplay. Sometimes your neighbour does things that messes up your plans, or your long-term Ally betrays you for no apparent reasons or because there was a misunderstanding. But that's not an interference in gameplay, in my opinion, it's part of it.

Good luck with joining the Zuma. Let us know how that works out. I wonder how accepting the Zuma will be after Asylon seemingly is not on good terms with the Zuma at the moment. To be honest, any Realm would be suspicious if another Realm suddenly joins theirs.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 08:08:13 PM
Boom Vellos scores again.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 08:11:12 PM
Telryuna, none of us are comPlaining about what human realms could do to us. We are complaining about huge forces of gm controlled Ai that has done nothing till now and with a vague game plan ruining the game for us .

Oh and btw Asylon is hardly a zuma hated realm . If you look at the diplomacy map we are at peace, the only realm at peace with them and we get treated worse than everyone else because garrett doesnt like me for some reason Ig an oog .
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: dustole on January 08, 2012, 08:16:39 PM
Haven't Terran, Barca, D'hara and Asylon been feeding the Daimons?   If they need food to build their armies then it is likely you that is responsible for them having such a large force.  You should probably stop feeding them. 
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 08:21:43 PM
I see the Zuma as part of the game. They aren't interfering in gameplay, for me, they are simply part of the gameplay. You don't have full control over gameplay. Sometimes your neighbour does things that messes up your plans, or your long-term Ally betrays you for no apparent reasons or because there was a misunderstanding. But that's not an interference in gameplay, in my opinion, it's part of it.

I think you think that mostly because you are in Iashalur. Even if FangFang does attack you, he's just 9k CS far from home. You'll be okay. When he goes home, you can get back to expanding or doing whatever activities you had before. Maybe Iashalur was boring before the Zuma and needed spicing up; I dunno. Terran had quite a few conflicts brewing that we have now put on hold because we can't send an army to, say, Candials or Tower Fatmilak to involve ourselves in foreign politics. Not because we couldn't manage such an operation independently, we could, but because somebody might forge a message and send it to Haktoo while our army is away. The Zuma can be in our capital within 24 hours, maybe less with luck in the right seasons, if they want.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 08:22:06 PM
lol then they just steamroll us anyways...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 08, 2012, 08:24:28 PM
Haven't Terran, Barca, D'hara and Asylon been feeding the Daimons?   If they need food to build their armies then it is likely you that is responsible for them having such a large force.  You should probably stop feeding them.

Asylon had a regular trade; no other realm has engaged in any regular or meaningful commerce with the Zuma, unless Barca has been extorted recently, which is possible. A few Terran or D'Haran lords may have dropped off the occasional shipment, but not enough to have a meaningful impact for keeping a whole realm fed.

And, as Glaumring said: stop feeding them and they can just take it, and more.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 08:29:43 PM
I think you think that mostly because you are in Iashalur. Even if FangFang does attack you, he's just 9k CS far from home. You'll be okay. When he goes home, you can get back to expanding or doing whatever activities you had before. Maybe Iashalur was boring before the Zuma and needed spicing up; I dunno. Terran had quite a few conflicts brewing that we have now put on hold because we can't send an army to, say, Candials or Tower Fatmilak to involve ourselves in foreign politics. Not because we couldn't manage such an operation independently, we could, but because somebody might forge a message and send it to Haktoo while our army is away. The Zuma can be in our capital within 24 hours, maybe less with luck in the right seasons, if they want.

yeah or 3000cs of monsters will show up on our southern border and 3000cs in Vakreno and then 3000 in Itaufield, plus Itau goes rogue and then you scout Elets, Mech Alb and Barrowspeak and see 1400cs of monsters in each region, so the army thats in Kosht dealing with the populcae there gets wiped out and then marches back to the capital and the populace in Kosht decides to switch sides and go Zuma , then you ask the Zuma , " hey we are in Kosht everyday trying our best to get that region under control and the peasants there are a bit misguided and went over to your side so could you please send us our land back out of mutual respect for our treaties and the peace we enjoy..." and you get a massive demon clawed middle finger in your face... Makes one a bit indignant... Especially since as long as I have played Dwilight I have never ever seen Zuma inhabit any other regions beyond its deadzone.

So basically, just join them. If there is going to be players using the Zuma as a weapon to lash out at the human realms and there is nothing we can do about it, we will just join the Zuma and use them as a weapon against everyone else AND finally get to know the oh so secret hidden plans of why the Zuma have turned into huge dinks.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Telrunya on January 08, 2012, 08:30:57 PM
Quote
Telryuna, none of us are comPlaining about what human realms could do to us. We are complaining about huge forces of gm controlled Ai that has done nothing till now and with a vague game plan ruining the game for us . 

Whether it's Human Realms or the Zuma, they can mess up your plans. That's part of the game, not ruining it, in my opinion. There's little difference in my eyes. What if Astrum or the SA Realms with their mighty huge forces under vague reasons had decided to crush Asylon? You're at Peace with them too. Would that have ruined the game? Not in my opinion, it's all part of the game.

Quote
Haven't Terran, Barca, D'hara and Asylon been feeding the Daimons?

Yes. Asylon has been selling. A few D'Harans made trips as well sometimes, and I don't know the numbers involved. My character sold around 1000 Bushels himself as well.

Quote
I think you think that mostly because you are in Iashalur. Even if FangFang does attack you, he's just 9k CS far from home. You'll be okay. When he goes home, you can get back to expanding or doing whatever activities you had before. Maybe Iashalur was boring before the Zuma and needed spicing up; I dunno. Terran had quite a few conflicts brewing that we have now put on hold because we can't send an army to, say, Candials or Tower Fatmilak to involve ourselves in foreign politics. Not because we couldn't manage such an operation independently, we could, but because somebody might forge a message and send it to Haktoo while our army is away. The Zuma can be in our capital within 24 hours, maybe less with luck in the right seasons, if they want.

I'm in Iashalur right now yes, but I've played most of my time on Dwilight in D'Hara. I'm confident that if I was in Terran, Barca, Asylon or back in D'Hara right now, I would be saying exactly the same thing. D'Hara has in the past for the same reasons also never directly involved ourselves in Wars because we were damn afraid the Lurians would be attacking us the moment we did so.

Quote
we will just join the Zuma and use them as a weapon against everyone else AND finally get to know the oh so secret hidden plans of why the Zuma have turned into huge dinks.

Assuming they accept you.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 08:35:21 PM
Tel , we dont care about the human realms crushing us, we KNOW its part of the game, thats why we play BM, we know that the human realms play by the same rules as US, we know they are made up of disparate factions of humans LIKE US, who have their own agenda. Just because a realm like Astrum is big and powerful doesn't mean it can't be broken, or its army inept or its food sources cut off. The Zuma on the other hand do not even play by the same rules, their army gets crushed...Oh just call up some moe, oh we don't need food we are Zuma, oh all Daimons are loyal to Daimons, there isn't one Daimon who would go independent from then Zuma, and because there is only like 2 or 3 people controlling these vast armies and the GM's can probably just jump around to eachothers accounts the army is never without fail and always on time.

Assuming they accept us? We go over and switch sides like any other human realm and play the game as Zuma instead, we abandon Asylon and then just march up there as one vast horde retake the dead lands and there its done , we have our lands back as Asylon but now we are Zuman, then we start attacking anyone around us who doesn't like it. It would be hard for the Zuman to ban 28 nobles, 28 nobles who can't wait to help out and be Zuman. Plus once Terran sees how awesome it is to be Zuman they also join so there we got like near 50 nobles in Zuman lands, and then Barca says " Well if we stay alone we get wiped out by Zuma!" so they join, now the population of Zuman nobles is near 60 or 70 , we could even fit D'hara in there and that would be near a hundred nobles and if Aurvandiil wanted to join that put us up to 140, why stop there we could probably get the entire west coast to join...

And then once thats done, the Gm's could either decide to change things and acknowledge certain faults or end up banning half of Dwilight, ruining the server and shutting down Dwilight.

I want to play here, we want to play here, but it has to have some sort of clear rules, especially when we are dealing with NPC super power realms like the Zuma who are now cavorting and being manipulated by many realms in Dwilight against other realms.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Telrunya on January 08, 2012, 08:45:20 PM
Well, in my opinion, getting crushed by the Zuma or getting crushes by Astrum is the same thing. The Zuma play by Rules, just different ones. Zuma, Humans, Undead, Monsters, they are all part of the game. If you cannot accept the Zuma and oppose any action from them solely on the fact they are not a standard Human realm but a Daimon faction, then there really isn't much more to discuss. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that then. We simply think different on the matter of not-player Factions.

Though, the Zuma have been buying and demanding Food from other Realms, so it might very well play some importance to them.

Quote
Assuming they accept us? We go over and switch sides like any other human realm and play the game as Zuma instead, we abandon Asylon and then just march up there as one vast horde retake the dead lands and there its done , we have our lands back as Asylon but now we are Zuman, then we start attacking anyone around us who doesn't like it. It would be hard for the Zuman to ban 28 nobles, 28 nobles who can't wait to help out and be Zuman.


They could easily still ban you, no matter the numbers you bring, assuming there are no special restrictions surrounding joining the Zuma. Joining the Zuma doesn't suddenly mean they are friendly to you, give you the ability to recruit Daimons, let you do whatever you want or anything like that, so your scenario won't really hold up. The Humans that were part of the Daimons in the Fourth Invasion had pretty much no way to recruit an unit. Lastly, having everyone banished from the Zuma in no way shuts down Dwilight.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 09:28:06 PM
Its merely a protest action. I don't wish to join the Zuma to exploit that action. It is merely a way of showing a different point of view regarding the Zuma and their interactions with the game world. It is merely a scenerio that should be given thought.

I will also state this the above poll , I voted " I don't know" I do not love nor hate the Zuma, I always liked them being ingame and I enjoyed the benign relationship. I enjoyed working with the Zuma when I knew that our treaties and trade and peace was valid. I now find that they are worthless and that if we drop from peace to neutral or below our realm is dead. They would probably not recognize an 'alliance' so there is no point going there. What I have discovered is that there is no way to properly deal with them and nothing they say means anything, they are merely the Gm's toys and the players have made a mistake by thinking that they can play in Dwilight with them.

Meanwhile on BEL...

http://battlemaster.org/ShowScribeNote.php?ID=510212&Hash=c81c783f714ab3fb
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 08, 2012, 09:50:21 PM
Tom has stated previously (at the time the new estate code was put in) that if someone exploited the new estate loophole and switched the duchy of their region to the Zuma, that they would be dealt with very harshly--I'm pretty sure he said bolted.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 09:50:56 PM
Did you read what I said above at all?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 08, 2012, 10:13:59 PM
You can't simply join, as in "travel to the capital and pledge yourself to the realm, leaving friends behind". That option is not available for the Zuma capital. The only other option is switching duchies which as Artemesia and myself have both pointed out, is considered by Tom to be exploiting a bug.

If you wish to surrender to the Zuma, just send them a letter saying so. Have you tried that?

The problem, Vellos/Glaumring, is that all you see are problems; you need to be looking for possibilities. Perhaps you need to pause your DWI characters for a while, and come back when your attitude improves.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 10:17:12 PM
Pausing would not help! We need to be here to learn more about the Zuma!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 08, 2012, 10:35:38 PM
Ah, I didn't know that 'protesting' was you way of investigating the Zuma. But like I've said several times, that won't work.

Why don't you appoint an Ambassador to the Zuma, and send him down with no troops but a dozen scouts, and have him attempt to speak with the Zuma, or at least gather some basic intel? That's the time-honored mission of Ambassadors throughout history.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 08, 2012, 10:46:47 PM
They do have some guy down here actually. He seems fairly reasonable enough too. Also an ambassador. Not sure how much scouting he does. Not sure if that really makes much of a difference, but hey, he seems like a reasonable person to talk to.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 08, 2012, 11:02:45 PM
We have an Ambassador there and I will also head down there when I have time.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 08, 2012, 11:26:09 PM
Does it not bother you that your satisfaction with the Zuma is apparently at least partially based on privileged OOC knowledge you gained by long-term friendships with other players that not all players have access to? That would bother me.

You really like to attempt to read between the lines don't you. My satisfaction has nothing to do with what I know. I was satisfied with the Zuma when I played in D'Hara, back when I was a greenhorn who knew nothing about how they worked. My knowledge means I can sometimes see the cause of Zuma actions when others don't, sure but I like the Zuma regardless, I like the challenge and difference they add to Dwilight, and in my opinion a force like the Zuma is great for a frontier orientated continent.

It is time to face facts, Dwilight is NOT the same game as the other islands, just as BT is not. The Zuma are part of the difference. If you feel the Zuma ruin your experience, then probably this is not the island for you, just as if you felt invasions were nothing but a hindrance to your game, BT would not be the choice for you.

By the way, there is no rule against anyone knowing the mechanics behind the Zuma, there is a rule about Devs just giving away info they gleaned from the code. The majority of us avoid dealing with any part of the code that isn't related to whatever task we are currently working on, be it the doctrine upgrade, bugs or whatever. We do this so we aren't tempted to firstly use our knowledge in game, since that would obviously be a OOC abuse, and so we aren't tempted to just post everything whenever threads like this come up. People did work out the majority of the recruitment system for the invaders on BT, it is possible to work these things out.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 12:42:46 AM
You really like to attempt to read between the lines don't you. My satisfaction has nothing to do with what I know. I was satisfied with the Zuma when I played in D'Hara, back when I was a greenhorn who knew nothing about how they worked. My knowledge means I can sometimes see the cause of Zuma actions when others don't, sure but I like the Zuma regardless, I like the challenge and difference they add to Dwilight, and in my opinion a force like the Zuma is great for a frontier orientated continent.

I was fine with the Zuma when you were playing in D'Hara too.

But John: you haven't played near the Zuma in over 2 years. You like the challenge you have never faced, the difference with which you have not dealt. The Zuma today are not like the Zuma of two years ago. Its nice that you think the Zuma is great for a frontier oriented continent. It's convenient that they aren't on your frontier.

The problem, Vellos/Glaumring, is that all you see are problems; you need to be looking for possibilities. Perhaps you need to pause your DWI characters for a while, and come back when your attitude improves.

No, the problem is that I see so many possibilities in ZumaMaster, and see so many possibilities in Battlemaster, and vastly prefer the possibilities in Battlemaster. Yes, I see things that can be done in ZumaMaster. And they are woefully inferior to things that were in the works before the recent chain of events.

Please don't act like I haven't given any consideration to anything the Zuma do. I have.  On this thread and the other I have offered quite a few different theories about things the Zuma might be interested in, and noted how each of them was an inferior result.

Why don't you appoint an Ambassador to the Zuma, and send him down with no troops but a dozen scouts, and have him attempt to speak with the Zuma, or at least gather some basic intel? That's the time-honored mission of Ambassadors throughout history.

There are good reasons not to send an Ambassador.
1. They might ask for him to submit to torture, which could lead to some random incriminating message coming up, which would make things even worse
2. The ambassador might come across as "arrogant," which would lead, if Barca's example is to be believed, to even more problems
3. There is nothing to gain by it.

The Zuma have nothing to offer. They need food. We already have gold. They have CS; we have enough for our needs. If Astrum came marching down on us, maybe that would change. But the Zuma have done a good job of getting the humans to be friendly with each other.

That said, a character in Terran has expressed an interest in the role. Though it's against my (and Hireshmont's) better judgment, they'll probably be sent as a semi-permanent ambassador, OOCly because the Zuma are now the only game in town, and I'd like the players in Terran to get a chance to do something. Apparently the brewing conflicts of the last few years need to be put on hold for a while; to keep my realm entertained, I'll send an ambassador. ICly Hireshmont will do it because he hates Garret and would like to have another human have Haktoo's ear.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 01:00:57 AM
I was fine with the Zuma when you were playing in D'Hara too.

But John: you haven't played near the Zuma in over 2 years. You like the challenge you have never faced, the difference with which you have not dealt. The Zuma today are not like the Zuma of two years ago. Its nice that you think the Zuma is great for a frontier oriented continent. It's convenient that they aren't on your frontier.

No, the problem is that I see so many possibilities in ZumaMaster, and see so many possibilities in Battlemaster, and vastly prefer the possibilities in Battlemaster. Yes, I see things that can be done in ZumaMaster. And they are woefully inferior to things that were in the works before the recent chain of events.

Please don't act like I haven't given any consideration to anything the Zuma do. I have.  On this thread and the other I have offered quite a few different theories about things the Zuma might be interested in, and noted how each of them was an inferior result.

There are good reasons not to send an Ambassador.
1. They might ask for him to submit to torture, which could lead to some random incriminating message coming up, which would make things even worse
2. The ambassador might come across as "arrogant," which would lead, if Barca's example is to be believed, to even more problems
3. There is nothing to gain by it.

The Zuma have nothing to offer. They need food. We already have gold. They have CS; we have enough for our needs. If Astrum came marching down on us, maybe that would change. But the Zuma have done a good job of getting the humans to be friendly with each other.

That said, a character in Terran has expressed an interest in the role. Though it's against my (and Hireshmont's) better judgment, they'll probably be sent as a semi-permanent ambassador, OOCly because the Zuma are now the only game in town, and I'd like the players in Terran to get a chance to do something. Apparently the brewing conflicts of the last few years need to be put on hold for a while; to keep my realm entertained, I'll send an ambassador. ICly Hireshmont will do it because he hates Garret and would like to have another human have Haktoo's ear.

Nothing to gain? You don't consider perhaps reducing or eliminating the misunderstanding that lead to the Zuma being a threat to your realm as a good gain? Get over the idea that the Zuma are different. The same GM is playing them as always. He is following the same restrictions as always and follows the same game plan he set up from the beginning. They are acting differently mostly because there is ALOT more interaction with the Zuma now, and all that entails.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 01:04:46 AM
Good gods man, you really have some obsession with the Zuma.

Did you know that internally the Zuma have not given you a second thought until that letter from Terrence?

That means a few things to me.

1. You pissed off someone in a HUMAN realm enough that they want to have you destroyed.

2. You pissed of someone in a HUMAN realm who is apparently cunning enough to use forged letters and a commoner to pass it to the Zuma.

3. This pissed off individual in a HUMAN realm apparently knows enough about the Zuma that he/she was confident enough that Terran would be in trouble.

4. You really know nothing at all about how your realm factors into what the Zuma do.

Let me give it to you straight from the guy who does get enough messages to know more or less what the Zuma give their attention to.

They do not actively care about your realm. If you did not continually insist on going into their regions and annoying the hell out of them, then they might very well even forget you existed. In fact, your regular food shipments stopped a while ago, and I didn't make a fuss about it, and the daimons didn't mention it either.

After all, you generally don't go out of your way to swat a bug unless it's constantly buzzing in your face.

So what makes me confused, is why you seem like you really really want to be that annoying fly that gets swatted. And now that the scary powerful being has taken out the fly swatter, you start crying about how he's holding the fly swatter and how that's not right or something to that effect.

Well dude, I'm going to tell you right now, and even though I can't speak for the Zuma GM, history suggests what I'm about to tell you. If you stop talking to the daimons, stay put in your current regions, and play nice with the HUMAN realms, then really, even the scary western neighbors won't do anything to you.

Is it that hard to understand? But no, you'll say "Then what's their purpose?"

Well, that's the Catch-22 really. You can either take the risk and maybe be disappointed. Or you can avoid that risk and get nothing. You can't have it both ways you know. Right now you're disappointed. You don't like it. You think there's no way to recover the situation.

Solutions I present to you (I predict you will refuse them for whatever reason you make up):

1. Leave the realm. If that's not good enough for you... Leave the continent. You've played long enough to know how to deal with disappointment and inconveniences to your enjoyment.

2. Stop bothering the daimons. I am not !@#$ting you here. I am seriously telling you that if you actually make it clear that you have no interest in Zuma affairs, have no ill will towards them, and back this up with your actions in which you absolutely ignore the daimons, then really, they most likely won't care about you either. Maybe they might move through your regions if someone else pisses them off, but that's not very common, and you won't suffer long for it.

3. Modify your plans. Like, duh. It doesn't require a GM faction to put a wrench in everything you do or have ever done. Someone like Allison Kabrinski could just as easily !@#$ your entire !@#$ over if she wanted to, and unlike the daimons, she has more sinister weapons called religion, deception, and propaganda. No, I won't explain this.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Norrel on January 09, 2012, 01:16:30 AM
and play nice with the HUMAN realms, then really, even the scary western neighbors won't do anything to you.
The Zuma making people "play nice" is one of the things people are complaining about.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 01:25:26 AM
And if you don't then someone gets the idea to set the Zuma on you. It's a vicious cycle huh? Well you know...with all those people so pissed off at SA (Like Everguard, Thulsoma, Caerwyn) I'm surprised there still has been no such cunning attempt against them. And they're much higher profile than Terran.

Yeah, there was a little something but that was never as utterly bold as the forged letter against Terran.

So that just suggests that human realms can have their conflicts, and even destroy realms they don't like, without daimonic interference. It's been going on for years now.

If anything, the problem arises from people insisting on trying to poke the daimons. They think they're boring if they do nothing. They complain about them if they do anything.

Er...what, just what the heck do you want? And don't say "get rid of them".
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 09, 2012, 02:10:43 AM
The Zuma making people "play nice" is one of the things people are complaining about.
They're not making me play nice. My character is treating the Zuma like any other realm. I have no intention of letting the fact that they are a GM controlled faction influence the way that I react to them. So far this interaction has been limited, I'll admit. That would have changed, but apparently FangFang isn't going to end up in a region with me, so I won't be able to talk to him. :(

Anyway, I plan on, as much as possible, dealing with them like any other realm. Maybe that will get Astrum crushed under waves of unstoppable daimon hordes. Maybe it will get them to leave me alone. Who knows? But I'm not going to let that make me "play nice" with the other human realms so I can be ready to defend humanity just in case the Zuma attack someone. Because, honestly, there are a couple realms that Brance would be happy to see go up in smoke.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Bedwyr on January 09, 2012, 03:17:22 AM
That makes sense then; explains the difference.

But... but... I still don't understand what happened. Do they just not cause "An enemy is approaching" messages to happen? I guess all of Asylon's lords could be coordinatedly lying to Terran. It's possible. I don't find it highly likely.

Are the "an enemy is approaching" messages working, period?  I've sure never seen them work consistently.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 03:36:39 AM
Are the "an enemy is approaching" messages working, period?  I've sure never seen them work consistently.

Aren't they only sent to a subset of the realms nobles in any case? The region lord and maybe his knights? Perhaps the Duke as well I'm not sure there.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 09, 2012, 03:53:02 AM
I personally was rather surprised and a little bit disappointed when Garret sent out the ultimatum about the two new Astroist realms. I don't think we had even been a realm for a weak before we got accused of "plotting against the Zuma" somehow. I have spoken ooc with several players in Kabrinskia who haven't even spoken up about this in the forums, and we all agree that it's BS. I'm not going to let some NPC faction effect how I play, however. Even if there is something to figure out, it seems more like an ooc quest than an ic one, so there's no point in my character going out of his way to do stuff for me, the player. I think that's the problem a lot of people have with the Zuma. In order for you to find out anything about them, you have to go against what your character would think or do. Which kind of violates trying to play my character how I want to play him.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 09, 2012, 03:56:26 AM
Thats because there is nothing to learn about the Zuma, its made up on the fly. 
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Cadfan on January 09, 2012, 04:04:50 AM
For the right price I would be willing to sell my extensive in game observations of the Zuma.

LET THE BIDDING WAR COMMENCE.


Also the poll is not looking that great for the haters.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 09, 2012, 04:14:08 AM
I'm not going to let some NPC faction effect how I play, however.  you have to go against what your character would think or do. Which kind of violates trying to play my character how I want to play him.

Then don't think of them as an NPC faction--think of them as a non-allied realm with a hair-trigger temper. How would your character respond to that?

All this "my character doesn't act a certain way" stuff is annoying, and a little childish, and I'm tired of hearing it over and over. Nobody is asking you to violate how you want to play your character. Determine how your character would react to hearing the news of a presence of this Zuma Coalition, and act accordingly, IC. Stop whining incessantly about it on the forums!



Here's a challenge: spend one week, starting when you read this post, not talking about the Zuma on the forums. Instead, have your character react to them, in character. But don't play your character in any way that violates the persona you have developed for them, and accept the consequences of that.

 If your character is curious, or worried, have him act that way. If your character wants to contain them, or destroy them, by all means, play your character that way--but don't be surprised that the Zuma have a survival instinct, and will respond accordingly. Try to keep your plans secret.

If your character is the diplomatic sort, go to them as Ambassador.

If your character is greedy, try to sell them food.

If your character...you know what, you  know your characters better than I do. PLAY YOUR *1#$!!$#%q#r$ CHARACTER and stop whining about having to play them!

The Zuma are a great opportunity to develop your players character and persona.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 04:15:34 AM
Then don't think of them as an NPC faction--think of them as a non-allied realm with a hair-trigger temper. How would your character respond to that?

All this "my character doesn't act a certain way" stuff is annoying, and a little childish, and I'm tired of hearing it over and over. Nobody is asking you to violate how you want to play your character. Determine how your character would react to hearing the news of a presence of this Zuma Coalition, and act accordingly, IC. Stop whining incessantly about it on the forums!



Here's a challenge: spend one week, starting when you read this post, not talking about the Zuma on the forums. Instead, have your character react to them, in character. But don't play your character in any way that violates the persona you have developed for them, and accept the consequences of that.

 If your character is curious, or worried, have him act that way. If your character wants to contain them, or destroy them, by all means, play your character that way--but don't be surprised that the Zuma have a survival instinct, and will respond accordingly. Try to keep your plans secret.

If your character is the diplomatic sort, go to them as Ambassador.

If your character is greedy, try to sell them food.

If your character...you know what, you  know your characters better than I do. PLAY YOUR *1#$!!$#%q#r$ CHARACTER and stop whining about having to play them!

The Zuma are a great opportunity to develop your players character and persona.

But then their realms might die, and as we all know, realms are never meant to die in BM.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: dustole on January 09, 2012, 04:24:50 AM
I do like the not so subtle attempt by Garret to get other to hate Allison.   Is that twice now that he has used her as an example of what to fear more than the Daimons?   

I have visited the Daimons and I know that some have complained about not being able to stay in Zuma lands the whole time to talk to them.  I stayed there for a few days and now on my way back home.  We are still RPing as if I were there talking to Haktoo.   I recommend others try the same thing if you want to talk to Haktoo but can't afford to spend weeks there while doing it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 09, 2012, 04:54:52 AM
Then don't think of them as an NPC faction--think of them as a non-allied realm with a hair-trigger temper. How would your character respond to that?

All this "my character doesn't act a certain way" stuff is annoying, and a little childish, and I'm tired of hearing it over and over. Nobody is asking you to violate how you want to play your character. Determine how your character would react to hearing the news of a presence of this Zuma Coalition, and act accordingly, IC. Stop whining incessantly about it on the forums!



Here's a challenge: spend one week, starting when you read this post, not talking about the Zuma on the forums. Instead, have your character react to them, in character. But don't play your character in any way that violates the persona you have developed for them, and accept the consequences of that.

 If your character is curious, or worried, have him act that way. If your character wants to contain them, or destroy them, by all means, play your character that way--but don't be surprised that the Zuma have a survival instinct, and will respond accordingly. Try to keep your plans secret.

If your character is the diplomatic sort, go to them as Ambassador.

If your character is greedy, try to sell them food.

If your character...you know what, you  know your characters better than I do. PLAY YOUR *1#$!!$#%q#r$ CHARACTER and stop whining about having to play them!

The Zuma are a great opportunity to develop your players character and persona.

The problem with this being that it isn't just some other realm. It's one GM and Garret. So Gustav can't treat it as some collection of human nobles. It's literally one noble Gustav would not have anything to do with now, and some being that Gustav would not talk to unless he were pressed by the rest of Sanguis Astroism, seeing as he knows nothing about Haktoo.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 04:59:53 AM
The problem with this being that it isn't just some other realm. It's one GM and Garret. So Gustav can't treat it as some collection of human nobles. It's literally one noble Gustav would not have anything to do with now, and some being that Gustav would not talk to unless he were pressed by the rest of Sanguis Astroism, seeing as he knows nothing about Haktoo.

Actually is Garret and a collection of Zuma nobles. The fact that one GM plays the Zuma nobles is OOC information now isn't it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 05:20:00 AM
I do like the not so subtle attempt by Garret to get other to hate Allison.   Is that twice now that he has used her as an example of what to fear more than the Daimons?   

I have visited the Daimons and I know that some have complained about not being able to stay in Zuma lands the whole time to talk to them.  I stayed there for a few days and now on my way back home.  We are still RPing as if I were there talking to Haktoo.   I recommend others try the same thing if you want to talk to Haktoo but can't afford to spend weeks there while doing it.

Hey man, I've survived living with daimons. I kind of learned who to fear.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 05:50:52 AM
Hey man, I've survived living with daimons. I kind of learned who to fear.

Its the Zuma Daimons wives right? They are the real reason all the daimon overlords are looking for activities to occupy them outside of the Zumalands.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 06:16:29 AM
Well, I wouldn't know anything about daimonic marital customs, but Garret answers to a female daimon (If that really means anything since I don't think genders among daimons are analogous to human genders)

Screamer's also female (Yeah, I know, haha...Let it out...Now let's move on...)

Probably unintentional, but it leads to those adolescent giggles. OOCly of course. ICly that would probably lead to dying horribly as your ears bleed out your brains.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 06:22:33 AM
Well, I wouldn't know anything about daimonic marital customs, but Garret answers to a female daimon (If that really means anything since I don't think genders among daimons are analogous to human genders)

Screamer's also female (Yeah, I know, haha...Let it out...Now let's move on...)

Probably unintentional, but it leads to those adolescent giggles. OOCly of course. ICly that would probably lead to dying horribly as your ears bleed out your brains.

Good old Screamer. Would Garret be interested in publishing some works on the different Zuma Overlords? I doubt most players know about a good few of them, and have little idea about their characteristics.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 06:27:45 AM
Actually, Moritz did a little description of different daimons on the wiki already. Not sure how many people noticed that. There he finally described that Screamer has avian features.

Most of the daimons' appearances Garret doesn't actually know. And really, why would he? Just because he's ambassador for the Zuma Coalition doesn't mean he's not justifiably terrified of them and would much rather communicate from a safe distance.

Well, the real reason is mainly because no one asked. Usually the GM describes what the daimon that's doing the roleplaying event looks like. Sometimes it's pretty clear what the daimon probably looks like (You know, with a name like Flame...)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 06:37:39 AM
Actually, Moritz did a little description of different daimons on the wiki already. Not sure how many people noticed that. There he finally described that Screamer has avian features.

Most of the daimons' appearances Garret doesn't actually know. And really, why would he? Just because he's ambassador for the Zuma Coalition doesn't mean he's not justifiably terrified of them and would much rather communicate from a safe distance.

Well, the real reason is mainly because no one asked. Usually the GM describes what the daimon that's doing the roleplaying event looks like. Sometimes it's pretty clear what the daimon probably looks like (You know, with a name like Flame...)

Something more then there appearances would be helpful. Abilities, moods even cognitive abilities. If people knew that one Daimon was incapable of anything beyond destruction for example, they would know not to waste their time, and generate much frustration trying to reason with them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 06:46:58 AM
/me has to become the guinea pig to figure that out? Man this brings back memories of being a research subject...And no, I was not rebuilt to be stronger, faster, etc.

Well, interesting you say that because Garret did ask recently. I'm not sure exactly how and why he'd go out and tell people though. It's not as if he can out of the blue just go "Hey guys, look what I learned about the daimons!"

He could, but then it'd probably sound contrived. Instead I'll probably drop some hints to some people who have working relationships with Garret and see whether they feel like sharing. The more the merrier, I guess.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 09, 2012, 06:50:10 AM
I like where De-legro is going with this. I might add, perhaps the anger and frustration with the Zuma comes from alot of us hate being mobbed by a faceless horde, if the Zuma are fleshed out a bit and there is more to work with it can be understandable why a Zuma would be a certain way. I think perhaps its why I feel so strongly about the subject as of late, there really isn't anything out there and very few of us have actually dealt with the Zuma on a daily basis.

Describe, the Zuman people, what do they look like?

What do their abodes look like?

What do they wear etc etc , are their animals on Zuman lands

Do they have festivals or celebrations or is it like hell all day and they are just in fire and brimstone morning till night.

The Gm's have to dig deeper, bring us some meat and make us fall in love with the Zuman world, make it interesting. It doesn't take much for me to enjoy and be apart of a better imagined world.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 07:05:27 AM
/me has to become the guinea pig to figure that out? Man this brings back memories of being a research subject...And no, I was not rebuilt to be stronger, faster, etc.

Well, interesting you say that because Garret did ask recently. I'm not sure exactly how and why he'd go out and tell people though. It's not as if he can out of the blue just go "Hey guys, look what I learned about the daimons!"

He could, but then it'd probably sound contrived. Instead I'll probably drop some hints to some people who have working relationships with Garret and see whether they feel like sharing. The more the merrier, I guess.

Post it on the wiki. Its in game knowledge then. I like to make such things in the format of a book, and just pretend its reprinted throughout the island. You could even do so under a pen name.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 07:08:02 AM
I like where De-legro is going with this. I might add, perhaps the anger and frustration with the Zuma comes from alot of us hate being mobbed by a faceless horde, if the Zuma are fleshed out a bit and there is more to work with it can be understandable why a Zuma would be a certain way. I think perhaps its why I feel so strongly about the subject as of late, there really isn't anything out there and very few of us have actually dealt with the Zuma on a daily basis.

Describe, the Zuman people, what do they look like?

What do their abodes look like?

What do they wear etc etc , are their animals on Zuman lands

Do they have festivals or celebrations or is it like hell all day and they are just in fire and brimstone morning till night.

The Gm's have to dig deeper, bring us some meat and make us fall in love with the Zuman world, make it interesting. It doesn't take much for me to enjoy and be apart of a better imagined world.

Found the link Artemesia was talking about http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Igelfeld_Family/Von_Igelfeld_family_Memoirs/The_Dwilight_Daimons

The problem I have with such statements is
1) The GM have their own time restraints, this isn't their job
2) A lot of that info has been put out there, not the GM's fault that people don't share, nor should they be compelled to repeat this stuff over and over and over again.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 09, 2012, 07:52:21 AM
Actually is Garret and a collection of Zuma nobles. The fact that one GM plays the Zuma nobles is OOC information now isn't it.

And IC speaking, Gustav knows nothing about a collection of Zuma nobles. He just knows about Garret sending ultimatums and vague rumors about a leader.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vaylon Kenadell on January 09, 2012, 07:59:19 AM
My character recently visited the Zuma lands and discovered indeed that Garret knows surprisingly little about the Zuma. Fortunately, my character observed quite a bit on his own. It isn't much, but I believe it's more than most people know.

I think a good analogy to explain my character's viewpoint would be to say that human religions (such as Sanguis Astroism) are like the Nine Divines from the Elder Scrolls series -- and the daimons are like the Daedra.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on January 09, 2012, 09:02:57 AM
I think a good analogy to explain my character's viewpoint would be to say that human religions (such as Sanguis Astroism) are like the Nine Divines from the Elder Scrolls series -- and the daimons are like the Daedra.

Would you mind making this a bit less obscure for those of us whose main gaming outlet is BM itself?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 10:04:06 AM
And IC speaking, Gustav knows nothing about a collection of Zuma nobles. He just knows about Garret sending ultimatums and vague rumors about a leader.

Amazing enough, IC Juan knows nothing of Gustav. He barely knows about Allison, what is your point. If Gustav doesn't wish to educate himself further about a realm that is just south of him, that is ENTIRELY his choice. Unless what you are trying to say is that part of Gustav's character is that he is incapable of learning or showing curiosity. In which case, well who really cares he is obviously a hopeless case even if we sent him off to learn about Zuma school.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 02:28:18 PM
Actually about the Zuma...

On at least three separate group RP events I got characters to come to Nightmarch to check out the Zuma culture.

This was back in autumn of 2009. Basically during those times, the GM took a backseat and let me take the floor in presenting the Zuma natives, their buildings, architecture, what they look like (Yeah, I actually did tell a bunch of people. Glaumring: Your ambassador was among those people even. He got a souvenir from his trip too, an obsidian statue.)

I further explained their general "caste" system, what their clothing more or less denoted in relation to that, their recreational activities. I also mentioned that they eat what normal people eat.

I don't remember every name, but I do know that Graeth, who was a priest of Verdis Elementum back then (Was it Graeth? It was some priest from Asylon whose name started with a G and got an obsidian statue), Dasha (A freeman who did a lot of service to the Zuma as someone who hunted monsters and undead for them), Coturnix (Business contact who also got to find out stuff about Zuma history and culture), and I guess a few more.

Ah, but here's the thing: The Zuma are people, like all the other humans on Dwilight. One of the points I was trying to hint at in doing my independent RP parties where the daimons were only referred to in passing and never in the course of those roleplays intervened, was that the Zuma were, in fact, human like you and me. And what your characters should have somewhat figured out from that was that such a fact was probably pretty significant.

But instead, the general trend as I see now is that people more or less completely ignored the actual NPCs (NPC: Defined as non-player character, by definition, not played by any player...) and wanted to know about the daimons. In those cases, Garret knows the bad things that could happen if a mistake is made, so he basically decided, "You know what? They want to know about daimons so much they can do it on their own. I like being alive and healthy."

I don't know what the GM has done in the past regarding the actual Zuma, but I do know that I've put in the effort to explain as many aspects as I could think of to make those native humans seem more than some name. Whether anyone cared isn't my problem. But you might pause to wonder whether you might have been going about the Zuma Coalition entirely in the wrong order. Because, you know...Most of the time even you never actually meet a real daimon. The only daimon Garret has ever spoken to in person was Vates, and he was a special case. Even Haktoo he has only regarded from a distance.

So now that I've calmed down a little, I'll say what I probably should have said from the start.

There is a reason why there are daimons and a reason why there are humans living in such close proximity. You play humans, and while it's natural to be curious about the unknown, humans are also notoriously fearful of what they cannot understand, and instinctively seek something to ground themselves. I think that a very convenient "anchor" to give yourself some orientation in this alien "Netherworld" is to look at what you can understand. And usually, when humans see other humans that are managing relatively well in extraordinary circumstances, then regardless of what the humans look like or act, they are often seen as comrades and inspire hope. After all, if those humans have managed, why can't we?

And I will make a HUGE DISCLAIMER right now in case I inadvertently said too much: I am not involved in the GM's plans for the Zuma. What I just said was mainly conjecture (But I might add carefully thought out conjecture based on 1.5 years of careful observation and paying attention to what was going on in the Zuma Coalition). It does not necessarily reflect the views or intentions of the Zuma GM.

But should that really matter? Read what I suggested, and you decide for yourself whether what I say is true: That in a strange, terrifying world, humans first seek out what they are familiar with. If they see other humans, while they may be at first cautious, those native humans are nevertheless human. Sometimes our instinctive bonds that ties our species together overrules the complex thoughts born of our rational minds.

Might I add, by the way, that the above is certainly not obvious. If it were, then more people would be doing it. As it is...very few are.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 09, 2012, 03:03:21 PM
Describe, the Zuman people, what do they look like?

What do their abodes look like?

What do they wear etc etc , are their animals on Zuman lands

Do they have festivals or celebrations or is it like hell all day and they are just in fire and brimstone morning till night.

So... when are you going to do this for Asylon?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 03:09:52 PM
How many human realms bother with that anyway?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 03:14:44 PM
How many human realms bother with that anyway?

Ahh but like Glaumring said, he is too busy doing Ruler stuff. Obviously GM's have loads and loads of free time to dedicate to such stuff. By the way Artemesia did you save any of your descriptions of the Zuma?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 03:19:12 PM
Sadly...probably not. It was something I figured the other players would save and/or tell others themselves. That's really how it was more or less supposed to work, to get the reports out there from people who took the tour.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 09, 2012, 03:35:39 PM
Sadly...probably not. It was something I figured the other players would save and/or tell others themselves. That's really how it was more or less supposed to work, to get the reports out there from people who took the tour.

Pity well even if you remember the gist of it that would be helpful. Next task, get a character over to Garret for a little chit chat.  Pity I'm not a ambassador right now.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:29:06 PM
Good gods man, you really have some obsession with the Zuma.

Did you know that internally the Zuma have not given you a second thought until that letter from Terrence?

That means a few things to me.

1. You pissed off someone in a HUMAN realm enough that they want to have you destroyed.

2. You pissed of someone in a HUMAN realm who is apparently cunning enough to use forged letters and a commoner to pass it to the Zuma.

3. This pissed off individual in a HUMAN realm apparently knows enough about the Zuma that he/she was confident enough that Terran would be in trouble.

4. You really know nothing at all about how your realm factors into what the Zuma do.

Let me give it to you straight from the guy who does get enough messages to know more or less what the Zuma give their attention to.

They do not actively care about your realm. If you did not continually insist on going into their regions and annoying the hell out of them, then they might very well even forget you existed. In fact, your regular food shipments stopped a while ago, and I didn't make a fuss about it, and the daimons didn't mention it either.

After all, you generally don't go out of your way to swat a bug unless it's constantly buzzing in your face.

So what makes me confused, is why you seem like you really really want to be that annoying fly that gets swatted. And now that the scary powerful being has taken out the fly swatter, you start crying about how he's holding the fly swatter and how that's not right or something to that effect.

Well dude, I'm going to tell you right now, and even though I can't speak for the Zuma GM, history suggests what I'm about to tell you. If you stop talking to the daimons, stay put in your current regions, and play nice with the HUMAN realms, then really, even the scary western neighbors won't do anything to you.

Is it that hard to understand? But no, you'll say "Then what's their purpose?"

Well, that's the Catch-22 really. You can either take the risk and maybe be disappointed. Or you can avoid that risk and get nothing. You can't have it both ways you know. Right now you're disappointed. You don't like it. You think there's no way to recover the situation.

Solutions I present to you (I predict you will refuse them for whatever reason you make up):

1. Leave the realm. If that's not good enough for you... Leave the continent. You've played long enough to know how to deal with disappointment and inconveniences to your enjoyment.

2. Stop bothering the daimons. I am not !@#$ting you here. I am seriously telling you that if you actually make it clear that you have no interest in Zuma affairs, have no ill will towards them, and back this up with your actions in which you absolutely ignore the daimons, then really, they most likely won't care about you either. Maybe they might move through your regions if someone else pisses them off, but that's not very common, and you won't suffer long for it.

3. Modify your plans. Like, duh. It doesn't require a GM faction to put a wrench in everything you do or have ever done. Someone like Allison Kabrinski could just as easily !@#$ your entire !@#$ over if she wanted to, and unlike the daimons, she has more sinister weapons called religion, deception, and propaganda. No, I won't explain this.

Thank you for proving my point.

I am totally aware that Terran was basically irrelevant to the Zuma before Terrence's letter. I'm fine with that; I like that. I'd be fine with the Zuma deciding that they loathe the idea of a group of humans united in a defensive alliance; or they loathe the idea of nobility, and therefore deciding to destroy the Moot.

What I'm not find with is that the Zuma can switch from "No concern at all" to "Open war" based on one forged letter that was so easily and quickly disproven; that they will march 10,000 CS of troops across a continent based on one or two idle comments. As Geronus has said, they are a nuclear option: they cause the fallout from human conflicts to become too great, and so human conflicts must be stifled.

Regarding not bothering the daimons... I think you are wrong. The daimons attacked us because we were not bothering them. No, that's a lie actually: but that forged message? Yeah. It was a message encouraging everyone to NOT BOTHER THE ZUMA. It was a message telling people to do exactly what you're suggesting. And a commoner got hold of it and sent an obviously forged copy saying the opposite to the Zuma.

We could ignore the Zuma. But they won't ignore us the moment some disgruntled commoner decides to forge a message. So now, commoners are nobles: you better believe Terran's policy on adventurers is going to change. They're no different than us anymore, because they have the potential to wipe a realm out with one message.

Terran has been laying low for a while now; nearly a month since last contact with Haktoo. Hireshmont's IC contact with Garret has been minimal.

And I get that you're trying to implicate Allison both ICly and OOCly. Sweet: I don't care.

Regarding why nobody has tried to implicate SA... first, because most players who are not terrible RPers don't get a thrill out of watching many peoples' hard work be torn apart by GM actions. It's not a pretty sight. Second, because they're less vulnerable. SA could survive the full brunt of a Zuma invasion, and could survive to retaliate against whoever betrayed them. Third, because they're far away. Terran, Asylon, and Barca are uniquely vulnerable to Zuma issues. Betraying us to the Zuma is more potent than betraying Astrum to the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:33:07 PM
They're not making me play nice. My character is treating the Zuma like any other realm. I have no intention of letting the fact that they are a GM controlled faction influence the way that I react to them. So far this interaction has been limited, I'll admit. That would have changed, but apparently FangFang isn't going to end up in a region with me, so I won't be able to talk to him. :(

Anyway, I plan on, as much as possible, dealing with them like any other realm. Maybe that will get Astrum crushed under waves of unstoppable daimon hordes. Maybe it will get them to leave me alone. Who knows? But I'm not going to let that make me "play nice" with the other human realms so I can be ready to defend humanity just in case the Zuma attack someone. Because, honestly, there are a couple realms that Brance would be happy to see go up in smoke.

That's good to know that your realm located several days (weeks?) travel from the Zuma has not been radically changed by their actions. This is why I don't really trust that poll at all: because the people who have the least knowledge and the least interaction represent a majority of the voters, when those who actually have to deal with the Zuma have a much more negative opinion, ranging from completely and totally pissed off (Glaumring) to somewhat frustrated but willing to work with it (dustole). The only truly positive report about the Zuma I've heard from anyone nearby is from egamma; and, again, as a D'Haran, he can pick and choose when we interacts with the Zuma. The others of us can't choose.

And it's notable that your distance allows you to say "There are a couple realms Brance would be happy to see go up in smoke." Terran can't really say that. I'm not claiming that conflicts in Summerdale have been ended by the Zuma. I'm saying that everything near the Zuma has been put on hold. Kabrinskia probably still has some independent conflicts. D'Hara might have some. Terran, Asylon, and Barca thus far do not.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:34:30 PM
The same GM is playing them as always.

I've heard mixed things on this: is this actually true? I have heard people who might know say that Vates and Haktoo were the same GM, and I've heard they were different. I honestly don't know; but even haktoo was fine for quite a while.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:36:36 PM
I like where De-legro is going with this. I might add, perhaps the anger and frustration with the Zuma comes from alot of us hate being mobbed by a faceless horde, if the Zuma are fleshed out a bit and there is more to work with it can be understandable why a Zuma would be a certain way. I think perhaps its why I feel so strongly about the subject as of late, there really isn't anything out there and very few of us have actually dealt with the Zuma on a daily basis.

Describe, the Zuman people, what do they look like?

What do their abodes look like?

What do they wear etc etc , are their animals on Zuman lands

Do they have festivals or celebrations or is it like hell all day and they are just in fire and brimstone morning till night.

The Gm's have to dig deeper, bring us some meat and make us fall in love with the Zuman world, make it interesting. It doesn't take much for me to enjoy and be apart of a better imagined world.

This has all been on the Wiki for years.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:37:29 PM
Actually is Garret and a collection of Zuma nobles. The fact that one GM plays the Zuma nobles is OOC information now isn't it.

Actually it is Garret and a collection of daimons. There are no Zuma nobles, as we have been told a zillion times. "They don't think like us."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:38:04 PM
Its the Zuma Daimons wives right?

Unless Haktoo is a lesbian, no.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:39:53 PM
My character recently visited the Zuma lands and discovered indeed that Garret knows surprisingly little about the Zuma. Fortunately, my character observed quite a bit on his own. It isn't much, but I believe it's more than most people know.

I think a good analogy to explain my character's viewpoint would be to say that human religions (such as Sanguis Astroism) are like the Nine Divines from the Elder Scrolls series -- and the daimons are like the Daedra.

And your character was pestered for several weeks to share information, and chose not to. Which just shows the same problem as we had in the Fourth Invasion: from the GM's perspective, the information is all out there, "lots" of people know. But from player perspectives, actually a very few people know (and more know because they are OOC friends or on IRC a lot, which is an entirely different issue).
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 04:44:58 PM
Actually about the Zuma...

On at least three separate group RP events I got characters to come to Nightmarch to check out the Zuma culture.

Did anybody come to all 3? Hireshmont went twice.

This was back in autumn of 2009. Basically during those times, the GM took a backseat and let me take the floor in presenting the Zuma natives, their buildings, architecture, what they look like (Yeah, I actually did tell a bunch of people. Glaumring: Your ambassador was among those people even. He got a souvenir from his trip too, an obsidian statue.)

And that was actually pretty interesting and enjoyable.

I further explained their general "caste" system, what their clothing more or less denoted in relation to that, their recreational activities. I also mentioned that they eat what normal people eat.

Again, was interesting, is not "lost RP." I remember it.

I don't remember every name, but I do know that Graeth, who was a priest of Verdis Elementum back then (Was it Graeth? It was some priest from Asylon whose name started with a G and got an obsidian statue), Dasha (A freeman who did a lot of service to the Zuma as someone who hunted monsters and undead for them), Coturnix (Business contact who also got to find out stuff about Zuma history and culture), and I guess a few more.

And one noble whose name begins with "Hi" and ends with "reshmont."

Ah, but here's the thing: The Zuma are people, like all the other humans on Dwilight. One of the points I was trying to hint at in doing my independent RP parties where the daimons were only referred to in passing and never in the course of those roleplays intervened, was that the Zuma were, in fact, human like you and me. And what your characters should have somewhat figured out from that was that such a fact was probably pretty significant.

Well known and widely spread knowledge now; Hireshmont and Garret explained this pretty thoroughly in several fora during the height of the crisis.

And usually, when humans see other humans that are managing relatively well in extraordinary circumstances, then regardless of what the humans look like or act, they are often seen as comrades and inspire hope. After all, if those humans have managed, why can't we?

For some reason, I don't think many people will ever see Garret as a comrade who inspires hope.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 06:39:55 PM
Not Garret. The REAL NPCs. Called the Zuma. You know, the humans who run around worshiping the daimons? Yeah, THEY are the ones...you know what. Forget it. I'm not even going to try with you anymore. Bye bye Mr. Vellos guy. Bye bye!!  :)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 09, 2012, 07:07:57 PM
Not Garret. The REAL NPCs. Called the Zuma. You know, the humans who run around worshiping the daimons? Yeah, THEY are the ones...you know what. Forget it. I'm not even going to try with you anymore. Bye bye Mr. Vellos guy. Bye bye!!  :)

Yes, I'm wondering how the Manifest Path is going to react when they discover that there are plenty of humans uneaten by Daimons in the Zuma lands...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 07:14:31 PM
I'm sure tMP will figure out a way to spin it to their propaganda's purposes.

After all, we all know that it's not the fact that matters, but how you report it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 09, 2012, 07:23:59 PM
Yes, I'm wondering how the Manifest Path is going to react when they discover that there are plenty of humans uneaten by Daimons in the Zuma lands...

"We must liberate these subjugated humans from their daimonic oppressors."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 09, 2012, 07:55:45 PM
Amazing enough, IC Juan knows nothing of Gustav. He barely knows about Allison, what is your point. If Gustav doesn't wish to educate himself further about a realm that is just south of him, that is ENTIRELY his choice. Unless what you are trying to say is that part of Gustav's character is that he is incapable of learning or showing curiosity. In which case, well who really cares he is obviously a hopeless case even if we sent him off to learn about Zuma school.

Oh, sorry that Gustav has had other things to worry about (or was on the other side of the continent) until the past two weeks. How about we list them? He started off in Xinhai, well on the other side of the continent exactly opposite of where the Zuma sit. No reason to be interested in them. Then there was the war with the Libero and Raivan empires, yeah, a bit busy there, had not time nor reason to go off weeks at a time to study the Zuma, if he had even heard of them at this point. Then sometime later on was the Crusade, with a capital C, against Thulsoma, then Averoth. I'm sure there was tons of time for him to go off gallivanting around the Zuma lands then. Then he joined Astrum to help out in the war with Caerwyn and join Allison's colony. So he proceeded to go on and be Marshal of the army that took Golden Farrow and the rest of Caerwyn's lands for Kabrinskia. Then Kabrinskia was formed and he was put into the position of Ordermarshall (General) of the realm, running the army back and forth chasing off the various rogues and finishing up taking the regions that Kabrinskia claimed. Then he became Consul in Sanguis Astroism, and the Lord of Knyazes. He stepped down from Ordermarshall so he could focus on being Consul and Lord, but is still the Vice-Marshal of The Army of the Maddening Star. That's all that's happened up till about a week and a half ago. Tell me when during all this would Gustav suddenly get the urge to go off and study the Zuma? Especially when he has confidence that Allison, who is already visiting the Zuma, will inform him of what he needs to know?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 08:43:14 PM
Not Garret. The REAL NPCs. Called the Zuma. You know, the humans who run around worshiping the daimons? Yeah, THEY are the ones...you know what. Forget it. I'm not even going to try with you anymore. Bye bye Mr. Vellos guy. Bye bye!!  :)

I was.... umm... I was agreeing with you and expanding on what you said. I mean, I disagreed on other points, but, on that one, I was actually agreeing.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 09, 2012, 08:52:05 PM
Garret's best thought of as just a repository more or less. He's not Zuma. He's, when it comes down to it, still just like all the other humans.

Also, I did write up the wiki pages for all the Zuma regions (minus Kosht and Koshtlom). I did add what I could about general human culture in the areas.

It didn't look like anyone cared though because no one really bothered, at least to me, with the whole "The air is suffocating and you see shadows flickering just out of your vision"...Most just waltzed in, were like "Yo yo what up? Where da daimons?"

But even if none of that happened, I have yet to meet someone who described the area, like you know, how Grympen Mire is...a mire. Or how the Ruins of Walfurgisnacht has a crumbled tower. Or how Dragon Song has a huge temple structure.

A question would be: How reliable is the wiki, and how much of it is IC public knowledge?

To answer the latter: All those Zuma region pages are publicly available IC knowledge.

To the former: At least as far as the scope of my authority on editing the Zuma's wiki pages, yes, in fact, you can consider those pages reliable and bring the contents up in game. If there is anything seriously incorrect, the Zuma GM will intervene and correct it. If that is not the case, feel free to bring up anything and everything you find on the wiki in-game.

And looking at what I wrote, sure, they aren't exactly masterpieces. But neither do I think the information is really that lacking.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 09, 2012, 08:58:19 PM
Yes, I'm wondering how the Manifest Path is going to react when they discover that there are plenty of humans uneaten by Daimons in the Zuma lands...

They've been told several different times in several different ways. They should already know. If they don't... I'd be very surprised.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Solari on January 09, 2012, 10:08:16 PM
Yes, I'm wondering how the Manifest Path is going to react when they discover that there are plenty of humans uneaten by Daimons in the Zuma lands...

Those are just free range humans being fattened up before the slaughter.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 10, 2012, 03:31:10 AM
I've heard mixed things on this: is this actually true? I have heard people who might know say that Vates and Haktoo were the same GM, and I've heard they were different. I honestly don't know; but even haktoo was fine for quite a while.

Yes the reason there is confusion is at one time we had two Zuma GM's. One left so now we have only one. While we had two, there were some different "factions" within the Zuma. This still exists to some extent, but is no longer as pronounced. The Zuma now act the same as THOSE Zuma have always acted. Vates acted differently, Vates was never all there was to the Zuma though. Just like our own realms, the Zuma have disagreements, power struggles and the like, they aren't a hive mind.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 10, 2012, 05:10:04 AM
Just like our own realms, the Zuma have disagreements, power struggles and the like, they aren't a hive mind.

No, just a schizophrenic mind.

But, jokes aside; you either dropped a fairly large piece of IC information forum that you got ICly, or you got a very large piece of IC information OOCly elsewhere and just posted it on a public forum, or you don't have evidence of that, and are speculating. I'm not saying the Zuma don't have factions; just saying that news regarding Zuma v. Zuma conflict would be quite novel and quite important. I've personally never ruled it out; kind of kept it as a back-of-the-mind hypothetical, but never seen any evidence that suggested Zuma disunity.

About GMs: that makes sense.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vaylon Kenadell on January 10, 2012, 06:04:41 AM
And your character was pestered for several weeks to share information, and chose not to. Which just shows the same problem as we had in the Fourth Invasion: from the GM's perspective, the information is all out there, "lots" of people know. But from player perspectives, actually a very few people know (and more know because they are OOC friends or on IRC a lot, which is an entirely different issue).

For various reasons, it would not be in-character for him to talk about it. But I, the player, am dying to share everything I know.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Bedwyr on January 10, 2012, 06:33:20 AM
Yes, I'm wondering how the Manifest Path is going to react when they discover that there are plenty of humans uneaten by Daimons in the Zuma lands...

"We must liberate these subjugated humans from their daimonic oppressors."

^ This.  The Manifest Path (or at least Koli) is aware of this.  Koli is also aware that the Daimons turned entire villages on Beluaterra into barbeque pits.  He's assuming that the humans in Zuma lands are more or less equivalent to cattle and horses in human lands: Useful, and tasty.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 10, 2012, 07:59:51 AM
That there are different relations the daimons have within their own ranks is nothing new.

Read about the meeting between a Lefanis, a Chenier, (Oh boy, you know where this is going...) and Vates. And read the part where Ira appears and Vates stands off against Ira. It's on the wiki.

Next, read, also on the wiki, about Neel Arya going through the Zuma lands. How there was a priestess called Banti, a Zuma who spoke for at least some of the daimons, and who was subservient to them. Read about how there were different opinions about the outside humans, especially the remark about Agri hating humans and Banti's reply.

Also in Neel's wiki page on the subject is the event in the Ruins where Vates is revealed to be a unique case (Nothing new). There are other wiki pages that are never marked as being limited knowledge, so if you really wanted to you could have found all this information.

What does this suggest? That...uh, daimons are individuals too? Just letting you know that a lot more info is out there than some might at first believe. There are also pages from Lina Unti, and..er...well there was something from Rathan Himoura.

Yeah, these come from human sources, not all of them are that reliable, but that's the nature of these things. I've done real life research, and while I didn't specialize in historical research, I have done that before as well, and it's really hard and tedious finding sources and organizing them by things like when they were written and the possible social groups the writers fit in, all to find out whether the stuff those "eyewitnesses" wrote actually matched with each other.

Obviously don't strain yourselves doing it for a game. But for those with the time and the will, try searching the wiki for the terms "Zuma" or "daimon" and see what shakes out of the tree. Then compare the different pages and use reasoning to fill in some blanks.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 10, 2012, 09:59:23 AM
No, just a schizophrenic mind.

But, jokes aside; you either dropped a fairly large piece of IC information forum that you got ICly, or you got a very large piece of IC information OOCly elsewhere and just posted it on a public forum, or you don't have evidence of that, and are speculating. I'm not saying the Zuma don't have factions; just saying that news regarding Zuma v. Zuma conflict would be quite novel and quite important. I've personally never ruled it out; kind of kept it as a back-of-the-mind hypothetical, but never seen any evidence that suggested Zuma disunity.

About GMs: that makes sense.

Really? You guys never noticed the disunity at all? Sure to my knowledge no battles are fought, but it should be pretty obvious by now that promises made by some Zuma, and information provided by them is contradicted by others.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 10, 2012, 10:18:46 AM
But even if none of that happened, I have yet to meet someone who described the area, like you know, how Grympen Mire is...a mire. Or how the Ruins of Walfurgisnacht has a crumbled tower. Or how Dragon Song has a huge temple structure.

From when Terrence was in Dragon Song:

Quote
Roleplay from Terrence   (22 days, 19 hours ago)
Message sent to: Haktoo
Terrence walks silently through the apparently abandoned temple complex of Dragon Song, one hand on his sword hilt. He was tense - he had already been attacked by wild animals in the plains outside the temple. The animals hadn't gone down easy. They were savage, bestial things, more so than any wild animal he'd ever encountered before, and they seemed different. He couldn't quite put his fingers it, but they were...changed.

He shook his head. Best to keep his mind on his current situation. It certainly didn't seem any safer in here than out there. This temple complex seemed abandoned, but the adventurer kept catching glimpses of movement out of the corner of his eye. He'd stopped looking after the first few times, as there was never anything there when he looked. Just the countless dragon statues lining the walls. Some of them looked liked they'd been smashed apart, long ago, and put back together less than perfectly. He wondered if they'd been broken when the people of this temple turned against the great dragon of the Roost. Either way, he didn't like them. The eyes seemed to follow him as he walked through the temple, even those of the broken ones.

"I've had about enough of this," he thought. "Time for something different."

Terrence cups his hands to his mouth and bellows, "Haktoo! I am here, as ordered!"

His call echoes around the temple interior and he leans against a wall, one hand on his sword hilt, and waits.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 10, 2012, 02:35:45 PM
Kudos to you. I did say that I, specifically, didn't see any such RP. So if the GM did, well then it's good to know that stuff is being used.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 10, 2012, 02:50:25 PM
Really? You guys never noticed the disunity at all? Sure to my knowledge no battles are fought, but it should be pretty obvious by now that promises made by some Zuma, and information provided by them is contradicted by others.

Actually... no, not really. I've never seen one Zuma say something would or wouldn't happen, and another Zuma engage in actions to contradict that.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 10, 2012, 03:29:44 PM
Likewise, I'm sure the ruler of Summerdale does not know all the internal politics of, say, Madina. And we all take that as granted because there are a lot of different characters played by different players that have their own agendas.

But I think there is an unconscious double standard when we talk about a GM-controlled faction. As far as we need be concerned ICly, those are all different characters. It is only OOCly that we know the characters are all played (currently) by one player. Should that make a difference? It's the number of characters and the characters' different agendas that matter, not the players.

This is a point made even clearer by the arguments posed when people say that on continents where you can play two characters, the second character gets no treatment. This is true for some perhaps, but just as much this is not true.

So, forgetting for the moment that there is only one GM controlling all the daimons, what really suggest, ICly, that the daimons are so unified?

Actually, for a more local example that can be appreciated (Since a counter might be that Terran is just bordering the Zuma): Did you always suspect that Flavia would win in Barca?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 10, 2012, 05:53:20 PM
Likewise, I'm sure the ruler of Summerdale does not know all the internal politics of, say, Madina. And we all take that as granted because there are a lot of different characters played by different players that have their own agendas.

But Terran does know the internal politics of Aurvandil, Madina, Barca, D'Hara, Asylon, and to some extent the Lurias and Kabrinskia. ANd I imagine other realms keep tabs on neighbors' internal politics as well.

Actually, for a more local example that can be appreciated (Since a counter might be that Terran is just bordering the Zuma): Did you always suspect that Flavia would win in Barca?

After the Zuma threatened to destroy Barca if Flavia was not elected, yes, I expected Flavia to win. I was actually surprised it was even close. I was a bit surprised (well, not surprised; just disappointed) that the Zuma opted to put someone in power who has no known major stance on any of the political issues that have defined Barca in the past and who has chosen not to be involved in as much RP with other realms as with the GM; but it made since given that Flavia did interact heavily with the Zuma, apparently.

So, forgetting for the moment that there is only one GM controlling all the daimons, what really suggest, ICly, that the daimons are so unified?

1. When Haktoo says, in effect, "I am offended," daimons like Flame and Screamer and FangFang show up with armies to pursue the grievance
2. (Aside from one or two RPs on the wiki, which are quite old, and seem more irrelevant now as they date from when there was a second GM), there are no known instances of any observable disagreement among the Zuma
3. Haktoo holds all council positions doesn't she? I actually could be wrong on that one, I honestly don't know, but I assumed as much. If she does, that implies a similar degree of non-factionalism as Overlord to me as a player; and to Hireshmont as a character, it says that Haktoo is in complete control of everything
4. The Fourth and Fifth Invasions had divisions and factionalism within the GM factions: and it was clear and discernible that factions existed (even within each faction) if you put in any reasonable effort to interact. The Zuma have not shown similar behavior; it has never appeared evident that factions existed.
5. Garret has reliably spoken to represent the Zuma on the whole. Yes, Garret is unreliable; still, it leads to that perception.

They're otherworldly beings. Why would we assume they have internal conflicts like ours? Aren't we supposed to stop thinking like human nobles?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 10, 2012, 06:17:35 PM
After the Zuma threatened to destroy Barca if Flavia was not elected
Supportive quotes, please.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 10, 2012, 07:08:12 PM
Supportive quotes, please.

I'll admit it's hearsay; but it's hearsay from both Flavia herself, her supporters, and her detractors. I haven't heard it from the Zuma directly. So it could be completely made up by the Barcans; but they at least claim to have heard it credibly.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 02:18:15 PM
Quote
Letter from Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh   (14 days, 21 hours ago)
Message sent to everyone in your realm (20 recipients)

....

Many things prompted me to do this, but first and foremost, is the Zuma; you will not know this but, I have been in talks with the Zuma Magnate Screamer in my lands of Twainwood, and he has relayed my pleas for the safety of our Republic in turn to the Potentate Haktoo, upon her Nightscree throne. I can tell you with great confidence that this invasion won't end with the handing over of the last unique weapons, Screamer made it clear that Barca was to appease the Zuma, and they failed, only managing to anger the Zuma further.

....

Screamer, in concordance with Haktoo, has declared that they want an end to this conflict, but cannot do so when they perceive so much "arrogance" and "disregard" from our current leaders, and so Screamer tasked me with enacting change in the Republic, so that we may have an end to bloodshed and war, and in stead, be reconciled. I have pleaded the case of our people and our republic, and they have listened, and Screamer halted the massacres occurring in Twainwood, if we are to survive, we must forge a new path in this world, and though our old government served us well in our years of colonial expansion, it is time for a new government to take form.

.....

Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh
Senator of Twainwood
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 02:48:37 PM
After reading as far back in this thread as possible, I would now like togive my opinion about the Zuma:

When I joined Dwilight, I started in Pian en Luries and upon its creation joined the realm of Giask which was eventually destroyed. I moved to an area what was very close to the Zuma, but had little experience in dealing with them. Neither many of my realm mates who are mostly new players. But when we took Eregon, we did so because we knew the Zuma did not claimed these lands, and we did not knew we had to ask them permission before taking it. When Garret contacted me about it he confirmed that the Zuma does not claim Eregon, however informed me that we did have to ask the Zuma for permission. We could have known this if we actively searched for history about the Zuma, but that isn't the case. But I believe everyone has learned from this and it will not happen again.

Garret asked for soem sort of appeasement, but couldn't tell us what the Zuma desired. So after speaking with Chief Magistrate Hireshmont and King Glaumring we decided that an offering of food woul dbe agood idea. So we offered them 500 bushels for failing to ask their permission. Then Garret replied that they wanted the 500 bushels, but desired 4 unique weapons in good condition as well.

We had no unique weapons, neither did Terran and D'Hara. So my first thought was that we would never be able to get them. However with the aid of our allies, we came a long way in attaining the weapons. However time became an issue. The Zuma demanded impossible deadlines, and did cared less if we could live up to them or not. The weapons came from all corners of Dwilight, they had to be shipped to Barca and then repaired. It is a procces that takes time, time they didn't gave us. And because we didn't met the deadline, they came with more daimon armies and threathen to destroy Barca.

They started to complain about Eregon too. Due to a referendum a Lord was elected. They were angry because we weren't supposed to appoint a Lord or hold on to Eregon for that matter. Two things that were both beyond my control. And when I wanted to discuss things about Eregon from the first moment of this conflict, Garret ignored me. After some repeated letters all he said about is was as followed, "focus on attaing the unique weapons, Eregon is of later concern". I had to put some trust in Garret he said, and by doing that it seems I angered the Zuma even further.

They tell us nothing, but act furiously when you aren't able to read their minds.

Maybe the Barcans were rude too; wouldn't surprise me. Julius can be abrasive.
Julius indeed can be abrasive. He also knows to who he can be abrasive, and Zuma are not among those. I have been very polite with Garret from the beginning, I have apologized for every 'transgression' on our part, and I have always been straightforward that we desire a peaceful co-exsistence with the Zuma based on mutual respect for each other and each other's culters and ways.

If I could chose, I would chose for an all out PvP Dwilight without the Zuma. Why are they even there?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 12, 2012, 03:16:38 PM
Quote
Letter from Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh   (14 days, 21 hours ago)
While that is an interesting message, it is not proof. Not only does it not claim that the Zuma said "Elect Flavia or we will destroy you", but only a very slanted interpretation could extract that meaning from it. (At least from the extracts you have posted.)

Even more importantly, this is not a message from the Zuma. It is a message from another player, who can claim anything they want to support their own agenda.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 12, 2012, 03:43:15 PM
Letter from Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh   (14 days, 21 hours ago)
Message sent to everyone in your realm (20 recipients)

....

Many things prompted me to do this, but first and foremost, is the Zuma; you will not know this but, I have been in talks with the Zuma Magnate Screamer in my lands of Twainwood, and he has relayed my pleas for the safety of our Republic in turn to the Potentate Haktoo, upon her Nightscree throne. I can tell you with great confidence that this invasion won't end with the handing over of the last unique weapons, Screamer made it clear that Barca was to appease the Zuma, and they failed, only managing to anger the Zuma further.

....

Screamer, in concordance with Haktoo, has declared that they want an end to this conflict, but cannot do so when they perceive so much "arrogance" and "disregard" from our current leaders, and so Screamer tasked me with enacting change in the Republic, so that we may have an end to bloodshed and war, and in stead, be reconciled. I have pleaded the case of our people and our republic, and they have listened, and Screamer halted the massacres occurring in Twainwood, if we are to survive, we must forge a new path in this world, and though our old government served us well in our years of colonial expansion, it is time for a new government to take form.

.....

Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh
Senator of Twainwood


wouldn't this be the best forgery ever, if it could be pulled off?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 03:50:42 PM
Quote
Letter from Garret Artemesia   (11 days, 23 hours ago)

In this case, it is not my responsibility to keep track of your nobles' actions or whereabouts. If you are asking about whether Flavia actually talked to the daimons, then I can tell you that she did. However I am not qualified to speak about the contents of her exchange.

@Indirik, Garret didn't wanted to verify Flavia's story. As always, a lot of things come out of his mouth, but nothing you want to hear or ask for. Also, I had no way of contacting the Zuman Lords myself.

@egamma, the letter I posted from Flavia is authentic.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 12, 2012, 03:54:26 PM
@Indirik, Garret didn't wanted to verify Flavia's story. As always, a lot of things come out of his mouth, but nothing you want to hear or ask for. Also, I had no way of contacting the Zuman Lords myself.

@egamma, the letter I posted from Flavia is authentic.

Sure, but is she telling the truth?  ;D
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 12, 2012, 04:37:27 PM
@Indirik, Garret didn't wanted to verify Flavia's story. As always, a lot of things come out of his mouth, but nothing you want to hear or ask for. Also, I had no way of contacting the Zuman Lords myself.
That still doesn't make it proof that the Zuma made that demand. All you have is another player's IC claim that the Zuma threatened to destroy Barca unless she was elected. Seems to me to be a very clever IC play by a character to exploit the current situation in their bid for power. And, apparently, it worked. So Kudo's to Flavia! :D

I guess what I'm trying to get across here, is that before you get OOC mad at the ZumaGM for demanding that Flavia be elected or else Barca would be destroyed, that you consider the possibility that the Zuma did not actually make that demand at all. It is trivially easy for any character who has exclusive access to a Zuma daimon to claim that such a thing was actually demanded.

Making claims like this based on second-hand information is always problematic. You have no way of verifying the accuracy of the information. It is entirely possible that the player made up or twisted the information for their own purposes. This is the advantage/power that any ambassador holds, or anyone who deals with a foreign government. When you make OOC accusations against other players using this information, then you risk accusing them based on incorrect information. This  makes people angry when you accuse them of doing things they didn't do. Which, I think, is what happened a lot in this Zuma incident.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 12, 2012, 06:11:58 PM
Well...Garret can't very well say what he is not qualified to proclaim, right? There was someone else from Barca who asked the same stuff to Garret as Julius did, maybe she was better at reading between the lines.

I guess I can explain a little about my very limited role in the Zuma. I am only a messenger. I transfer letters between the daimons and the humans. I won't say how much is copy+paste, since that's uh...metagaming or something?

About the Flavia thing: Like any good representative who is not supposed to place those he represents in potentially troublesome situations, Garret, I believe, said what he needed. He said, in a somewhat roundabout way typical of human diplomats (Oh believe me, Garret is definitely more direct than some of Dwilight's human mouths) what hinted along the lines of "The daimons are not meant to be kingmakers. Your choice what to believe." And like anyone who talks in public to humans, he pretty much said "I neither affirm nor deny..." Yeah...you've all heard that before. Annoying sometimes, but it might mean something. No one tried tricky ways to get Garret to slip though. o.O

Keyword here is choice, something I decided independently to make a recurring theme. There is always a choice. Sometimes it might, but actually more rarely than you might think, result in two choices between "Do this, or die". But even then, is it so bad to die, even if you die without knowing why? But then again, most of the time the other choice(s) do not involved actually being destroyed/dead/something so bad and terminal as that. I guess often the choices might be damning no matter which alternative you choose.

Maybe the moral is that you should pay a lot more attention to what your own nobles do than what the Zuma do.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 07:32:46 PM
I guess what I'm trying to get across here, is that before you get OOC mad at the ZumaGM for demanding that Flavia be elected or else Barca would be destroyed, that you consider the possibility that the Zuma did not actually make that demand at all. It is trivially easy for any character who has exclusive access to a Zuma daimon to claim that such a thing was actually demanded.
You do not hear me saying that I blame the Zuma GM for this. From the moment Flavia said this I told her that there was no ground for her claims. And when I contacted Garret, he refused to confirm if the agreement we had changed due to the 'negotiations' of Flavia. And when an agreement has changed, I think the highest authority of the Republic of Barca deserves to know that. All I got out of Garret were cryptic phrases that made me assume that there was an agreement with Flavia I wasn't supposed to know of. To confirm this, the moment that Flavia was elected, the Zuma agreed to peace with Barca.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 12, 2012, 07:42:51 PM
My comment was not aimed solely, or even specifically, at you. (Which, I know, is odd because I posted in response to a post of yours that I quoted... Oh well.)

Another key point: Garret is not the Zuma. He is not privy to everything that happens in Zumaland. Possibly not even the majority of what happens in Zumaland. Most likely he only knows what the Zuma are willing to tell him. Which may or may not mean that he knows anything worthwhile or important to any particular situation. Many people have figured this out, and are taking steps to cut Garret out of the loop when it comes to important stuff. It will make some things more difficult, but will hopefully make other things easier.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 07:51:29 PM
If you read the letters between us regarding this topic, you understand that Garret knew a lot more about the matter than he wanted to tell me.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 12, 2012, 08:09:27 PM
... I didn't say he was completely ignorant, did I? I just said he doesn't know everything. From what I've heard of the vague and mysterious way he talks, it wouldn't be hard to drop hints that would make you think he knew more than he wanted to admit.

But this is just some friendly OOC advice to help reduce your frustration levels. As with all advice, take it or not, at your discretion. After all, it's only worth what you paid for it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 08:25:27 PM
Well while I would love to continue my reign as Suffete, it does give some relief now I do not have the responsibilities as Suffete any more. And besides what has happened between the Zuma and Flavia, it worked for Barca. And it is something I can use against her later. My political career isn't over. Or as Schwarzenegger would say: "I'll be back!"  ;)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 12, 2012, 08:46:37 PM
I do have to admit that that is one of the things I do like about republics. Any time you want, you can just stop running for election, and stop being ruler without feeling like you're giving up.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 12, 2012, 10:44:31 PM
Well while I would love to continue my reign as Suffete, it does give some relief now I do not have the responsibilities as Suffete any more. And besides what has happened between the Zuma and Flavia, it worked for Barca. And it is something I can use against her later. My political career isn't over. Or as Schwarzenegger would say: "I'll be back!"  ;)

Or as he said later, "My son will be back!"
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 12, 2012, 10:46:47 PM
I do have to admit that that is one of the things I do like about republics. Any time you want, you can just stop running for election, and stop being ruler without feeling like you're giving up.
Indeed
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 13, 2012, 12:03:36 AM
Something that people haven't figured out (Strangely enough) is that it's usually more...er...tame(?) to deal with a human than a daimon. Also you won't have to deal with the strangeness of incomprehensible daimons if you deal solely with another human. Common sense advice.

I found it ironic when there was someone talking about Garret's supposed job security, and how he exaggerates his importance, and then had his representative nearly eaten by a daimon.  ::)

Ah well, enough about this on the forum from me. The important thing to remember is that Garret likes magic scrolls except for scrolls of banishment since that can be troublesome for him, and that I hate squirrels. If nothing else remember that my nemesis is the rodent.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 13, 2012, 12:19:38 AM
Next shipment from Knyazes to the Zuma Ambassador... rats that have been plaguing our warehouses.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 13, 2012, 12:22:41 AM
Ooh rats! Let you in on something: In Runescape I always cook rat meat and only eat rat meat, and only use rat meat for the meat pies.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 13, 2012, 12:23:26 AM
>_>

some rodent phobia you have...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 13, 2012, 12:33:51 AM
Quote
Letter from Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh   (14 days, 21 hours ago)
Message sent to everyone in your realm (20 recipients)

....

Many things prompted me to do this, but first and foremost, is the Zuma; you will not know this but, I have been in talks with the Zuma Magnate Screamer in my lands of Twainwood, and he has relayed my pleas for the safety of our Republic in turn to the Potentate Haktoo, upon her Nightscree throne. I can tell you with great confidence that this invasion won't end with the handing over of the last unique weapons, Screamer made it clear that Barca was to appease the Zuma, and they failed, only managing to anger the Zuma further.

....

Screamer, in concordance with Haktoo, has declared that they want an end to this conflict, but cannot do so when they perceive so much "arrogance" and "disregard" from our current leaders, and so Screamer tasked me with enacting change in the Republic, so that we may have an end to bloodshed and war, and in stead, be reconciled. I have pleaded the case of our people and our republic, and they have listened, and Screamer halted the massacres occurring in Twainwood, if we are to survive, we must forge a new path in this world, and though our old government served us well in our years of colonial expansion, it is time for a new government to take form.

.....

Flavia Constantia O'Duibheannaigh
Senator of Twainwood

Interesting, I was under the impression that Screamer couldn't actually speak the Human language based on some of the wiki articles.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 13, 2012, 12:35:32 AM
Well, we could always RP that there was a Zuma translator there. (whether a minor Daimon or a human Zuma, I don't know.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 13, 2012, 12:37:20 AM
Well, we could always RP that there was a Zuma translator there. (whether a minor Daimon or a human Zuma, I don't know.)

I'm not entirely sure Screamer speaks any comprehensible language, but I have no evidence for that, it was just the impression I got.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 13, 2012, 01:00:08 AM
Yes, I'm quite sure it's name is Screamer for a reason. Probably bawls out the minor daimons until they cry, and they don't even understand what Screamer was yelling at them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 13, 2012, 01:15:03 AM
Yes, I'm quite sure it's name is Screamer for a reason. Probably bawls out the minor daimons until they cry, and they don't even understand what Screamer was yelling at them.

There are several wiki references about the effects of Screamers voice. It can knock people unconscious, it can cause religious rapture among the Zuma. I believe she also uses it for torture.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 13, 2012, 02:20:16 AM
>_>

some rodent phobia you have...

Garret will out and gently caressing eat your rats. And if tMP and SA declare their separate and/or united holy wars on the daimons, Garret will declare a holy war on rodents. Well, not really, since that would...actually be pretty SMA. I'm sure there have been holy wars over less defined enemies, and just because the enemy isn't human doesn't mean anything (Well, duh. Seeing as how there would be holy wars against the non-human daimons before holy wars against the non-human rodents.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 13, 2012, 06:13:03 AM
Screamer can speak human language.

Quote
Visit   (22 days, 15 hours ago)
While you rot in your cell, Screamer, visits you and says:

"You coming here is why you still live. We must have truth, human tell truth when we do this. You tell more if want. Who make you do forge letter? Whatever answer, once we know, you be free."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 13, 2012, 10:23:05 AM
"You coming here is why you still live. We must have truth, human tell truth when we do this. You tell more if want. Who make you do forge letter? Whatever answer, once we know, you be free."

The Zuma, they want to know the truth, but you may give them whatever answer you want. I would know who to blame for the forged letter.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 13, 2012, 12:05:42 PM
Uh..It might not actually be Screamer who speaks but a Zuma among her entourage.

The way to tell this is to pay attention to the initial encounter. I'm not sure how it goes with Screamer since the only times Garret has experienced her presence was the couple of times she blasted soundwaves that knocked him out. But with someone like Haktoo, generally how it goes is that a Zuma approaches you and speaks to you.

And that just raises the question that should be considered, even when talking to a daimon "directly". Because you never know whether the one writing back is still another human, a Zuma, speaking for the daimon. And yes, Zuma humans do talk like that sometimes.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 13, 2012, 01:55:17 PM
Well, the message specifically said Screamer visited Terrence in jail and spoke to him. Don't know how much more specific you can get.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 13, 2012, 02:30:27 PM
Well, the message specifically said Screamer visited Terrence in jail and spoke to him. Don't know how much more specific you can get.

That single message posted was one of a number sent whilst Terrence was in the Zuma dungeons. The messages either side of the quoted one set the scene, making it clear what was happening and who was speaking. The message before the one quoted (sent 2 hours earlier) ended as a question, Terrence replied, and then the quoted message was sent. An hour later, after another response from Terrence, another message was sent which also included details about  the surroundings and who was interacting. In all others it was made quite clear that it was not Screamer doing the talking. Apologies if this one caused any confusion, that was certainly not the intention.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 13, 2012, 04:55:11 PM
Well, the message specifically said Screamer visited Terrence in jail and spoke to him. Don't know how much more specific you can get.

Also, the entire first line of text, 'Screamer comes and visits you in your cell and says:' is actually game generated text that *always* occurs when a judge communicates with a prisoner.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 13, 2012, 05:02:22 PM
Also, the entire first line of text, 'Screamer comes and visits you in your cell and says:' is actually game generated text that *always* occurs when a judge communicates with a prisoner.
Limitation of the system, unfortunately. You'll have to live with it for now. I think that Tim has noted this for a possible future change.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 13, 2012, 05:51:08 PM
Limitation of the system, unfortunately. You'll have to live with it for now. I think that Tim has noted this for a possible future change.

I would approve. I don't understand why the game doesn't just use the standard messaging interface for prisoner communications. I get that the idea is that you're not really writing them a letter, but you can't force people to RP appropriately...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 14, 2012, 01:47:28 AM
That single message posted was one of a number sent whilst Terrence was in the Zuma dungeons. The messages either side of the quoted one set the scene, making it clear what was happening and who was speaking. The message before the one quoted (sent 2 hours earlier) ended as a question, Terrence replied, and then the quoted message was sent. An hour later, after another response from Terrence, another message was sent which also included details about  the surroundings and who was interacting. In all others it was made quite clear that it was not Screamer doing the talking. Apologies if this one caused any confusion, that was certainly not the intention.

Well, fairly obviously it wasn't made clear, else I'd have known. I got one RP from Haktoo RPing the capture (which I didn't actually get until after I'd escaped). I also got five messages saying "Screamer visits you in jail and says..." The first one said five Zuma came into the room and one tortured me. Although it doesn't mention Screamer by name, it certainly seemed like a reasonable assumption. Some of the others referred to "the Zuma" as the one interacting with Terrence, but given every one of those messages was prefaced by "Screamer comes into your cell and says..." it again seems reasonable to assume "the Zuma" was Screamer.

It's all very well to say, "Oh, it's a limitation of the system", but how is either Terrence or I supposed to know that?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 14, 2012, 02:49:07 AM
Because it's a game mechanic, maybe...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on January 14, 2012, 03:02:57 AM
And? So because it's a game mechanic, I should automatically assume the person sending the message actually meant something different, but were unable to express it because of limiting mechanics? And I should be able to read their minds and know exactly what it was they were trying to express? That should be my first assumption upon getting any message from the game, now?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 14, 2012, 12:44:58 PM
It's all very well to say, "Oh, it's a limitation of the system", but how is either Terrence or I supposed to know that?

That is a fair point. Although people that have had any dealings will (hopefully) be aware that when talking about Zuma doing things it is referring to the humans that live with the Daimons rather than the Daimons themselves, it is not something that is clear from the offset. Apologies for any misunderstanding caused.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 14, 2012, 09:27:05 PM
That is a fair point. Although people that have had any dealings will (hopefully) be aware that when talking about Zuma doing things it is referring to the humans that live with the Daimons rather than the Daimons themselves, it is not something that is clear from the offset. Apologies for any misunderstanding caused.

Hireshmont is very much of the opinion that he has had a face-to-face conversation with Haktoo. Never received any RPs to contradict that, and that's usually how he does diplomacy anywhere else. Is that erroneous? I think I even sent an RP about coming up to the volcano or something, but didn't get a response. I know I sent an RP in Nightmarch that didn't get a response.

And... don't mechanics trump RP? If the game says "Screamer said" then doesn't it necessarily mean "Screamer said"?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 14, 2012, 11:10:37 PM
Hireshmont is very much of the opinion that he has had a face-to-face conversation with Haktoo. Never received any RPs to contradict that, and that's usually how he does diplomacy anywhere else. Is that erroneous? I think I even sent an RP about coming up to the volcano or something, but didn't get a response. I know I sent an RP in Nightmarch that didn't get a response.

And... don't mechanics trump RP? If the game says "Screamer said" then doesn't it necessarily mean "Screamer said"?

No, no more then it would if I RP'd my noble as mute.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 14, 2012, 11:15:25 PM
No, no more then it would if I RP'd my noble as mute.

Hmm...great idea for my next character!

Of course...he'd blend in with half the people in the realm.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on January 15, 2012, 12:31:24 AM
And... don't mechanics trump RP? If the game says "Screamer said" then doesn't it necessarily mean "Screamer said"?

Mechanics trump RP.

Canned game messages do not trump RP unless there is a clear reason for them to do so.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 16, 2012, 01:44:24 AM
Mechanics trump RP.

Canned game messages do not trump RP unless there is a clear reason for them to do so.

That seems a very thin line.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 16, 2012, 03:06:56 AM
That seems a very thin line.

Not particularly. Game mechanics and in game messages aren't there to restrict creative RP, but they are there to guide the game. In extreme examples, this rule is there to prevent things like people RPing that they one a battle they didn't, or that they avoided a infiltrator when the game clearly tells us they were stabbed etc.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Galvez on January 16, 2012, 11:08:50 AM
Hireshmont is very much of the opinion that he has had a face-to-face conversation with Haktoo.
I believe that could be possible. The fact that screamer doesn't speak is for your own benefit, his voice is loud.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 16, 2012, 01:57:58 PM
As far as I've seen, only Vates made it a regular habit of speaking directly to humans. Agri might have to Neel, but that's only according to the wiki page.

As far as Screamer and Haktoo and all the other current daimons, I believe that only Haktoo ever actually "speaks" to humans. And by that I mean she actually makes sounds that can be heard in the normal range of human hearing, that do not cause damage, and that can be deciphered into something that resembles human language.

It's important to pay attention to the initial RP engaging your character. Does it say "the daimon/Haktoo approaches you and says..." or does it say "a Zuma approaches you and says..."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 16, 2012, 06:44:31 PM
It's important to pay attention to the initial RP engaging your character. Does it say "the daimon/Haktoo approaches you and says..." or does it say "a Zuma approaches you and says..."

Or does it say neither, and you just receive messages that are part of a conversation?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 16, 2012, 10:10:02 PM
Or does it say neither, and you just receive messages that are part of a conversation?

So you never got the message that started the conversation?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 17, 2012, 06:14:43 AM
No; the first message didn't say either "A zuma approaches you..." nor "Haktoo approaches..." It was just a simple answer to a query. I don't remember (though it's possible I'm forgetting) Haktoo sending any RPs while I was in Volcano Nightscree.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 28, 2012, 07:09:24 PM
lol, so, the Zuma attacked Terran (finally?).

And then the message system broke, so we can't IC communicate.

YES!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 29, 2012, 02:24:26 AM
lol, ironically if the messaging system broke sooner they wouldn't have attacked you.

(Hint: It's what Terran said/did)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 29, 2012, 02:55:56 AM
(Hint: It's what Terran said/did)

No, really? That's amazing! You mean we might have somehow provoked the Zuma?

Gee, I'm shocked.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 29, 2012, 03:49:46 AM
(Hint: It's what Terran said/did)
That's why they call him Captain Obvious!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Perth on January 29, 2012, 08:45:53 AM
(Hint: It's what Terran said/did)

What exactly?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Perth on January 29, 2012, 08:51:58 AM
(Hint: It's what Terran said/did)


Also, I find it interesting that for as many freaking times as we've been told that the Daimons see themselves as so far superior to us, that we are like ants to the them, and that our efforts and relations with each other so insignifcant as to even warrant their attention, etc, etc.... the Daimon's sure are an extremely sensitive bunch to what we "ants" say.

The Zuma are like hyper self-conscience middle girls who decide to throw the biggest fit of "Oh, no you didn't... Imma make your life horrible, bitch" if you so much as hint that you don't like the shirt they wore on Wednesday.

I think it's pretty clear that the Daimons care A LOT about we humans say and think about them. Our thoughts, words and actions are pretty damn significant to them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 29, 2012, 10:01:44 AM
What exactly?

I can think of 3 things we've done that could set off a Zuma rage-loot just in the last 3 days.

Honestly, I'm not surprised by the most recent attacks. I'm just frustrated that I'm unable to speak to foreign allies during the incident. It's kind of making things a wee bit tricksy.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 29, 2012, 10:24:56 AM
I am seriously considering getting rid of my character on Dwilight because of the Zuma. If I had wanted to fight against GM's I would have gotten a character on Beluaterra. I joined Terra because I wanted to help a small realm grow and expanded, not deal with unfair odds. For the past like yeah and a half(for me at least) I didn't care because they never did anything. Now it just like lets mess stuff up by destroying our neighbors with an unfair advantage when they might not have been even expecting it for the most mundane things.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 29, 2012, 11:57:39 AM
That's why they call him Captain Obvious!

Due to my dedication to stating the obvious above and beyond the call of duty, I have recently been promoted to Rear Admiral Obvious, in command of the Royal Apparent Fleet, and will receive the Medal of A Piece of Metal when returning home.

But to be more specific, the thing that really set them off was when Hireshmont decided that he could convert Zuma and/or use Zuma imposters to call himself by some pompous name.

And about what the ants say...Well, I'm sure you'd also get out your ant spray if suddenly ants invaded your home, or if say, their cousins, the termites, started gnawing your wood. It's not as if you actually care about them exactly, it's more like they're becoming more annoying than they were before. So if they minded their own business (Which y'all are demonstrating an inability to do...Seriously, just stop messaging the daimons and stop going into their lands) those ants won't have to worry about being stepped on.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 29, 2012, 12:30:45 PM
I'll try to give you guys something useful here because this topic always seems to draw its negativity and I might not always help the situation. So I'll attempt to explain what I am able to.

First off, it's true that anything and everything the daimons have done and (most likely) ever will do is dependent on what humans do to them. By analogy, you don't care about the lives of a bunch of flies, but if they buzz around in your face, you will swat them. Same with the daimons. They really don't care about humans, but if they do something annoying or threatening, they will nevertheless kill them. It has nothing to do with sensitivity. It has everything to do with indifferent destruction as a natural reaction.

Secondly, no one said you had to fight a GM faction. In fact, it was made pretty clear I believe that Dwilight is absolutely not an Invasionesque continent where you have to fight GM-controlled daimons. That doesn't mean you can't if you really decide you want to poke the sleeping lion. But again, that's a result of human decisions. There are actually a lot of other things you can do with the daimons, and I'm not just speaking on my own here. You can ask some other people who have managed "deals" with the daimons before.

To give a better idea of how it works, understand that dealing with the daimons will raise your blood pressure because you will get frustrated. Look, my blood pressure gets raised too because not only do I deal with daimons I have to take an earful from frustrated humans as well. But some people persist and get something. It's all about how much you want what you desire and how far you're willing to go to gain it. If a bunch of words you don't like can already put you off your ambitions, then I guess they weren't strong enough to warrant a deal with daimons in the first place. Yeah, the tone can often be condescending/whatever, but hey, it happens often, especially in real life.

And yes, I know that Asylon had its "treaty" broken. But that is just another example of humancentric thinking. I know as well that some people think the goal of the daimons is to create vassal states, and that is definitely not the case. They have their Zuma already, and that is pretty much good enough for them. Yes, there are goals for the current batch of humans, but Haktoo's not like Overlord, going around saying "Serve me or die".

On the other hand, I am still astounded at the pride of many humans. Is it really that hard to say "I'm sorry"?

I feel like I've stated the obvious again. But then the question is: If it's all so obvious, why do people so consistently fail in those regards...for three years now?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 29, 2012, 09:52:27 PM
First off, it's true that anything and everything the daimons have done and (most likely) ever will do is dependent on what humans do to them. By analogy, you don't care about the lives of a bunch of flies, but if they buzz around in your face, you will swat them. Same with the daimons. They really don't care about humans, but if they do something annoying or threatening, they will nevertheless kill them. It has nothing to do with sensitivity. It has everything to do with indifferent destruction as a natural reaction.

Secondly, no one said you had to fight a GM faction.

Except it is other players doing stuff to the Zuma who fall for stuff like a forged letter, and then it is my army who gets unfairly raped. I never wanted to try to fight the Zuma yet they keep for what ever *dumb* reason attack. I put '*' around dumb because sure it may be bearable if they only attacked when a country announced publicly they want them destroyed, but instead it is over mundane stuff. When they have such ridiculous armies that is annoying. At this point for me it does feel like I have to fight the Zuma because if I don't another player will manipulate them into attacking me.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 29, 2012, 09:59:39 PM

The Zuma are like hyper self-conscience middle girls who decide to throw the biggest fit of "Oh, no you didn't... Imma make your life horrible, bitch" if you so much as hint that you don't like the shirt they wore on Wednesday.


So true.

I am seriously considering getting rid of my character on Dwilight because of the Zuma. If I had wanted to fight against GM's I would have gotten a character on Beluaterra.

I am seriously thinking the same thing. It's just not fun playing against the Daimons. They're unpredictable in the worst way, massively overpowered and THEY DONT ROLEPLAY (or they roleplay themselves as solitary isolated beings, except from when suddenly they're not and they wordlessly invade neighbors. "LOL I DONT SAY ANYTHING BUT YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT MAKES ME MAD" <- sounds like my last girlfriend). Also doesn't help that their mouthpiece is IC/OOC one of the most annoying players I've come across

Look, I get it. Its there to add flavor, some people love them (although the above poll would be more valid if we could see how many people who like the Zuma are actually near them on the island).

HOWEVER, Dwilight was supposed to be a large, colonial-style SERIOUS MEDIEVAL ATMOSPHERE island.

I signed up thinking I would have a chance to play on an island that respected historical correctness to some degree and could thereby simulate warfare and politics in a medieval style world. And yet, we have a group of mystical beings who are smack dab in the middle of Dwi who are invading neighbors with Demon Armies.... I feel like Im taking crazy pills!!!! Whats SMA about this???

On Beluaterra it makes sense. Its what people signed up for. Theres intrigue and a GM driven story and they players know what they're getting themselves into.

All Im saying is, since its too late to remove the Zuma, let people know what they're getting into. Add a footnote to the Dwilight Intro:

Attention: Dwilight is the home to an extremely powerful Daimon faction who imposes upon the sovereignty of it's neighbors, demands complete obedience and is vague and cumbersome in terms of diplomacy.



Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 29, 2012, 10:22:12 PM
and THEY DONT ROLEPLAY (or they roleplay themselves as solitary isolated beings, except from when suddenly they're not and they wordlessly invade neighbors. "LOL I DONT SAY ANYTHING BUT YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT MAKES ME MAD"

Don't roleplay? Please don't come onto the forums and just lie to people. Unless I miss it, as I do have a lot of messages to go through every day, I interact with everyone that tries to interact with me.

Attention: Dwilight is the home to an extremely powerful Daimon faction who imposes upon the sovereignty of it's neighbors, demands complete obedience and is vague and cumbersome in terms of diplomacy.

That also is another lie. Perhaps other players spread propaganda within the game that states that the Zuma demand complete obedience, but that has certainly never been the case.

Please be clear when you come onto these forums exactly where you get your facts from or make it clear when it is just speculation based on your personal assumptions.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 29, 2012, 10:41:26 PM
So true.

I am seriously thinking the same thing. It's just not fun playing against the Daimons. They're unpredictable in the worst way, massively overpowered and THEY DONT ROLEPLAY (or they roleplay themselves as solitary isolated beings, except from when suddenly they're not and they wordlessly invade neighbors. "LOL I DONT SAY ANYTHING BUT YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT MAKES ME MAD" <- sounds like my last girlfriend). Also doesn't help that their mouthpiece is IC/OOC one of the most annoying players I've come across

Look, I get it. Its there to add flavor, some people love them (although the above poll would be more valid if we could see how many people who like the Zuma are actually near them on the island).

HOWEVER, Dwilight was supposed to be a large, colonial-style SERIOUS MEDIEVAL ATMOSPHERE island.

I signed up thinking I would have a chance to play on an island that respected historical correctness to some degree and could thereby simulate warfare and politics in a medieval style world. And yet, we have a group of mystical beings who are smack dab in the middle of Dwi who are invading neighbors with Demon Armies.... I feel like Im taking crazy pills!!!! Whats SMA about this???

On Beluaterra it makes sense. Its what people signed up for. Theres intrigue and a GM driven story and they players know what they're getting themselves into.

All Im saying is, since its too late to remove the Zuma, let people know what they're getting into. Add a footnote to the Dwilight Intro:

Attention: Dwilight is the home to an extremely powerful Daimon faction who imposes upon the sovereignty of it's neighbors, demands complete obedience and is vague and cumbersome in terms of diplomacy.

Or alternatively, you could read what SMA means in the context of BM, and accept that your expectations where unrealistic.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 12:28:56 AM
Or alternatively, you could read what SMA means in the context of BM, and accept that your expectations where unrealistic.

From the wiki on SMA:

"Non-European Realm/Religion Concepts
While these are acceptable on other islands, we are very, very sceptical about them on any island where we are looking for a serious medieval atmosphere. Some will be ok, a little bit of orient can spice things up, but the vast majority would only dilute and disturb the atmosphere. That goes especially for any asian or american concepts. Basically anything that the middle ages did not have much contact with. Again, there are other islands in BattleMaster where these ideas can be explored."

What this would imply to a new character who is seeking an SMA oriented island is that since orientalism and americanisms are discouraged, probably interplanetary demigods wont be present. In fact, a new player would probably assume such a thing fell under the nothing silly and unrealistic aspect of the SMA guidelines.

However, I'm not saying that we should get rid of Daemons because they are not SMA, all I'm saying is include a notice on the Dwilight intro that says "Strong presence of Daimons (powerful GM faction) on Dwilight".

I know that if I had seen that, I probably wouldn't have gone to Dwilight as I prefer the Player vs. player playstyle.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 12:53:39 AM
Don't roleplay? Please don't come onto the forums and just lie to people. Unless I miss it, as I do have a lot of messages to go through every day, I interact with everyone that tries to interact with me.

That also is another lie. Perhaps other players spread propaganda within the game that states that the Zuma demand complete obedience, but that has certainly never been the case.

Please be clear when you come onto these forums exactly where you get your facts from or make it clear when it is just speculation based on your personal assumptions.

My understanding of events:

A new player from Terran accidently roams into Zuma lands, does no damage than returns.

Haktoo makes a demand (via Garett) that the player go to Volcano Nightscree.

Hireshmont complies with Haktoo's request and sends the player off. In addition, Hireshmont tells Garett (via Zuma Triunists) that Hireshmont does not wish to correspond with him and that Garett should either (a) speak to Terran's ambassadors in Nightscree or (b) meet with Hireshmont face to face in Chesney ( the reason Hireshmont said this to Garett is because the feeling around Terran is that Garett can't be trusted)

Next, the Zuma invade Terran with 12,000 CS and attack two regions. So either:

A: Garett misunderstood the message and thought Hireshmont asked to meet with Daemons in Chesney. Which means the Zuma have an awful ambassador.

or

B: The Daemons are extremely sensitive and demand utmost respect and humility from the human underlings around them. Showing any contempt towards them results in indefensible military strikes.

Again, though. This isn't a criticism against the Zuma GM or the initial idea or anything. Im just letting everyone know that a lot of the players who are having interactions with the Daimons, including me, are not exactly having a good time about it. If you want to ignore those people and keep playing the Daemons in the same way, thats your call, but this whole "if you dont like it, quit" attitude isn't exactly healthy for player retention.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 12:56:31 AM
From the wiki on SMA:

"Non-European Realm/Religion Concepts
While these are acceptable on other islands, we are very, very sceptical about them on any island where we are looking for a serious medieval atmosphere. Some will be ok, a little bit of orient can spice things up, but the vast majority would only dilute and disturb the atmosphere. That goes especially for any asian or american concepts. Basically anything that the middle ages did not have much contact with. Again, there are other islands in BattleMaster where these ideas can be explored."

What this would imply to a new character who is seeking an SMA oriented island is that since orientalism and americanisms are discouraged, probably interplanetary demigods wont be present. In fact, a new player would probably assume such a thing fell under the nothing silly and unrealistic aspect of the SMA guidelines.

However, I'm not saying that we should get rid of Daemons because they are not SMA, all I'm saying is include a notice on the Dwilight intro that says "Strong presence of Daimons (powerful GM faction) on Dwilight".

I know that if I had seen that, I probably wouldn't have gone to Dwilight as I prefer the Player vs. player playstyle.

Show me where is says Dwilight is suddenly not a low-fantasy island? When you read the entire page, including the Do's and Dont's it should be clear that SMA is mostly about how you interact with other players, not an attempt to introduce historical accuracy to the setting. If you are going to take a single section of text, and not apply to it the context of the surrounding text, well you have a promising career as a Evangelical Christian, or a Political Commentator on FOX.

If people would stop poking the Zuma, they could go back to being that mysterious quiet faction that they were for YEARS. You know back when people used to whine that there was no point to them, that they never did anything and were boring.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 30, 2012, 01:05:46 AM
Show me where is says Dwilight is suddenly not a low-fantasy island? When you read the entire page, including the Do's and Dont's it should be clear that SMA is mostly about how you interact with other players, not an attempt to introduce historical accuracy to the setting. If you are going to take a single section of text, and not apply to it the context of the surrounding text, well you have a promising career as a Evangelical Christian, or a Political Commentator on FOX.

If people would stop poking the Zuma, they could go back to being that mysterious quiet faction that they were for YEARS. You know back when people used to whine that there was no point to them, that they never did anything and were boring.

You just disproved your own argument when you said that SMA is mostly about how you interact with other players. Not mysterious NPC factions.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 01:08:36 AM
You just disproved your own argument when you said that SMA is mostly about how you interact with other players. Not mysterious NPC factions.

Um yeah sure. That is almost as logical as the stuff I've written for the Manifest Path :)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 01:09:20 AM
lol, this just goes to show what I have often repeated (And at risk of being labelled obvious by the usual suspect...)

You can't make everyone happy. Most of the time you can't make anyone happy.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 01:13:00 AM
lol, this just goes to show what I have often repeated (And at risk of being labelled obvious by the usual suspect...)

You can't make everyone happy. Most of the time you can't make anyone happy.

You miss the important aspect though. While you can't make everyone happy, the real problem is both sides will always insist that their experience is more relevant and valid. You only need to look at Star : War Galaxies to see how trying to please on largish group of players results in pissing an even larger portion of the players.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 30, 2012, 01:25:37 AM
Um yeah sure. That is almost as logical as the stuff I've written for the Manifest Path :)

How so? You just said yourself that SMA is about interacting with other players. How are we supposed to do that if all we're worried about is some unknowable Zuma, who aren't other players, constantly intervening with the realms of the players we are supposed to be interacting with?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 01:36:25 AM
How so? You just said yourself that SMA is about interacting with other players. How are we supposed to do that if all we're worried about is some unknowable Zuma, who aren't other players, constantly intervening with the realms of the players we are supposed to be interacting with?

By ensuring that you aren't annoying the Zuma? You know how it used to be, when everyone pretty much ignored them and they pretty much ignored us? Since SMA is all about such little things, like using titles, not sending excessive OOC message etc. I see no reason why SMA can't be in full force even if the Zuma were stomping on every realm at the same time. Plenty of chance to send SMA appropriate letters about how doomed we all are.

"This is our term for roleplaying the game as it is meant to be. That does not mean pages upon pages of text, but rather playing your character as if he were a real human being in a real world. You can be as short or elaborate as you want to in doing that, but try to be realistic."

What the Zuma do and don't do is largely irrelevant to playing your character in this manner.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 30, 2012, 01:40:48 AM
By ensuring that you aren't annoying the Zuma? You know how it used to be, when everyone pretty much ignored them and they pretty much ignored us? Since SMA is all about such little things, like using titles, not sending excessive OOC message etc. I see no reason why SMA can't be in full force even if the Zuma were stomping on every realm at the same time. Plenty of chance to send SMA appropriate letters about how doomed we all are.

"This is our term for roleplaying the game as it is meant to be. That does not mean pages upon pages of text, but rather playing your character as if he were a real human being in a real world. You can be as short or elaborate as you want to in doing that, but try to be realistic."

What the Zuma do and don't do is largely irrelevant to playing your character in this manner.

More like there was no one in their general area. It wasn't that people were trying to ignore them, but now there are actually realms close by.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 01:46:16 AM
If you are going to take a single section of text, and not apply to it the context of the surrounding text, well you have a promising career as a Evangelical Christian, or a Political Commentator on FOX.

Nice, but I've been civil so let's leave personal attacks out of this. (also, if I was an evangical Christian that'd be a really unnecessary attack against my religion....)

You miss the important aspect though. While you can't make everyone happy, the real problem is both sides will always insist that their experience is more relevant and valid.

I never claimed my experience was more relevant, simply that I was not having a positive experience, and that others were in the same boat as me.

Also, De Legro, I'm not here to attack the idea of Daemons on Dwi or the Zuma GM. It's just that the way they interact with the players is something that detracts from the funness of the game for me. I think I'm not alone in this. The interference from the Zuma is significantly changing the spirit of the game for me and now I feel like I'm not playing the PvP focussed game I want to be.

I'm just stating my thoughts, so I don't know why you're trying to change my mind by attacking my opinions.

If you're thinknig, "If you don't like it, quit, because it's fine for everyone else"

Well, maybe you're right, and perhaps I'll have better luck with a more PvP oriented game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 01:50:08 AM
How so? You just said yourself that SMA is about interacting with other players. How are we supposed to do that if all we're worried about is some unknowable Zuma, who aren't other players, constantly intervening with the realms of the players we are supposed to be interacting with?

I think this is a big part of the problem.

I get that the Zuma want to be dark, mysterious and unknowable, but the fact that OOC info is as scarce as IC info is an annoying and unnecessary addition to the Zuma's "flair".

Also, if there is only one GM controlling every Daemon, this is a serious design flaw.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 01:54:33 AM
More like there was no one in their general area. It wasn't that people were trying to ignore them, but now there are actually realms close by.

Terran has been where it is for MANY years sure it is larger but some of their core regions are the closest regions to the Zuma. Before Barca we had Ordenstaat. Caerwyn was also reasonably close to the Zuma borders. Asylon is the only realm that I can see in a position near the Zuma that wasn't pretty much there when I started, and even it heralds back to 2009, and was founded only after extensive interaction with the Zuma. Its not like the Western continent was empty before now.

Trust me back in 2008-2009 it was rare that a character would try to approach the Zuma, we in D'Hara did it a bit. Players sought them out, players tried to get them involved in the larger dealings of Dwilight, whether the attempt was to get the Zuma to fight some enemy (yes I am aware of attempts to convince them of this since 2008 at least. A faction in D'Hara tried it to get them to war against both Terran and SA at one stage), for economical gain or just for information.

My own take on the Zuma has always been that they represent the "dragon" factor of Dwilight. Only where in RL the mere rumours and belief in dragons was enough, in a game like this to simulate the fear such a mythical monster generated, they actually need to exist.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 01:56:20 AM
I think this is a big part of the problem.

I get that the Zuma want to be dark, mysterious and unknowable, but the fact that OOC info is as scarce as IC info is an annoying and unnecessary addition to the Zuma's "flair".

Also, if there is only one GM controlling every Daemon, this is a serious design flaw.

What is the design flaw specifically. Part of the problem is that historically in BM being a GM has been a rather thankless and time consuming task. Further finding players that can actually play a GM in a fair and balanced manner can be a difficult task itself.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 30, 2012, 02:16:51 AM
What amazes me is that the viewpoints of the players who are forced to deal with the Zuma regularly by dint of proximity are so consistently ignored, dismissed, poo pooed, or outright attacked on these forums. The point of the Zuma, presumably, is to add something to the player experience and hopefully not solely to provide some GM with a toy to play with for his own amusement. Given that fact, I would think that player feedback would be taken seriously.

I recognize that the natural reaction to criticism, especially when said criticism is not always delivered in a constructive manner, is to become defensive. However, this tendency also leads those who are being criticized to dismiss *all* criticism as invalid, when that's not the case. Clearly the manner in which the Zuma are run is a source of increasing frustration to the players who are having to deal with them. I would think that a review of why this is the case might be in order, along with some honest consideration of how the experience could be improved for everyone involved. After all, what's more important, the plot or the players? It sounds to me like the Zuma are losing the players. When players start throwing up their hands and talk about deleting their characters out of frustration, something isn't working. This is the point where I, as a GM running an RPG for some friends expressing this level of frustration, would be engaging in some serious introspection and reconsidering my entire campaign.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 02:21:18 AM
It's probably the phenomenon of finding a scapegoat really.

Easy to complain about something perceived as having unfair advantages because most of us don't understand how they work. Harder to complain about a human realm that is limited to the same rules. Also because more people are allowed in those human realms.

Having fewer GMs is actually better actually. Can you imagine if different GMs competed over whose vision was better? For example, if we put the current Zuma GM, Vellos, and Chenier, all into one NPC realm and told them to dictate the future. I reckon the daimons would implode. Having fewer means a more cohesive faction. Sure, it might not be to some people's tastes. That's too bad.

The daimons have been around since the start of Dwilight. If you must know, they were most likely created at the same time as the original 4 realms. By now, new players who decide to join any realm close to the Zuma Coalition should be told first thing they arrive what they can expect. It's not a categorical requirement for the continent to read: "Beware of daimons" because seriously, if people aren't stupid, then no one has to beware of daimons.

So the onus is on the human realm to ensure that its characters and players both understand that there is in fact a powerful NPC faction nearby, that has been there since the beginning of the continent. Best learn how to live with them, or face the consequences. It is very, very clear. Is it unclear? If so, where is it unclear? I think it is pretty clear, and I'm just like any other human player: Uninvolved with the higher plans of the GM, and I'm pretty sure I'm the one player on Dwilight who would be barred from ever becoming a GM due to my position.

If you want to debate SMA, then do it in the appropriate thread. While you're at it, talk about those monsters/undead that no one seems to complain about. Oh, could it possibly be because you think no one is controlling those?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 02:33:53 AM
Ok, here's what I think is going on here.

Players around the Zuma want to play empire builder. It appears though, that such is not a possibility in their location. Much like becoming a major food producer is impossible in Balance's Retreat duchy. It's an unfortunate reality of location, and just because it's not as clearly obvious as stats would suggest, I think it's not that hard to figure out that you can't play empire builder near the Zuma as you might be able to in the east, in say, where Morek is.

If you think that was obvious, then you shouldn't be complaining much about the reality of your situation which is so obvious.

Now, another thing might be their frustration at not understanding how the daimons work. They think they are unstoppable or something. Well, actually, the point might not actually be to defeat the daimons. Maybe, just maybe, they are intentionally incapable of being defeated permanently. It seems as though players are hesitant to believe this might be a possibility because that would interfere with their plans. Possibly their empire builder plans.

Then I must ask: Why choose to continue to play in places that are affected by the Zuma? IC loyalty? Very well, then that remains your choice. To complain about it would be immature. If you had no idea what you were getting into, and by the time you wised up it was too late, then how unfortunate. You still can back out. What do you lose? Your positions in a game that are immaterial?

I think that something that is a point of contention as well is the unpredictability and the perceived arbitrariness of that. It's not. Certain daimons will respond a certain way.

Actually, I'll even help you out a little since I have more or less patiently watched people fail for at least three years now, starting with what I witnessed in 2008 while sitting as a rogue in a Netherworld region.

Your tone really, really matters. The more power a human gains apparently the more arrogant he gets. This is natural, and really, nothing wrong with it, except, when prudence is necessary. I'd say dealing with daimons definitely requires control. What makes you believe that talking so full of yourself would go well with daimons? ICly it might go against your character's strict values. Ok, but then accept the consequences. For example, Indirik would probably play Brance as arrogant to the end, even if it meant his downfall.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 02:35:05 AM
Oberservable Daimon forces on a recent scouting.

Volcano Nightscree- 20850cs
Dragon song- 0cs
Grymphen mire 7750cs
Kosht-6500cs

total=35100cs


Astrum perceived total = 25000cs
Terran=12000cs
Asylon=10000cs
Barca=9000cs
D'Hara=7000cs
Iashular=5000cs
Kabrinskia=10000cs

Total= 78000cs

Thats 35000cs in Daimons within spitting distance of Asylon, Daimons that have proven to go against their word, and attack realms without warning. What is  realm like Asylon supposed to do? We are basically in bury our heads mode and just hope the Zuma go away. Which doesnt seem likely because everyone is trying to buddy buddy up with the Daimons. Its lame...

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2012, 02:36:18 AM
Can I nominate Garrett as the scapegoat?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 30, 2012, 03:21:07 AM
Oberservable Daimon forces on a recent scouting.

Volcano Nightscree- 20850cs
Dragon song- 0cs
Grymphen mire 7750cs
Kosht-6500cs

total=35100cs


Astrum perceived total = 25000cs
Terran=12000cs
Asylon=10000cs
Barca=9000cs
D'Hara=7000cs
Iashular=5000cs
Kabrinskia=10000cs

Total= 78000cs

Thats 35000cs in Daimons within spitting distance of Asylon, Daimons that have proven to go against their word, and attack realms without warning. What is  realm like Asylon supposed to do? We are basically in bury our heads mode and just hope the Zuma go away. Which doesnt seem likely because everyone is trying to buddy buddy up with the Daimons. Its lame...

So what you're telling me is, if the humans actually wanted to get rid of the Zuma, they have twice the CS?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 03:30:05 AM
What amazes me is that the viewpoints of the players who are forced to deal with the Zuma regularly by dint of proximity are so consistently ignored, dismissed, poo pooed, or outright attacked on these forums. The point of the Zuma, presumably, is to add something to the player experience and hopefully not solely to provide some GM with a toy to play with for his own amusement. Given that fact, I would think that player feedback would be taken seriously.

I recognize that the natural reaction to criticism, especially when said criticism is not always delivered in a constructive manner, is to become defensive. However, this tendency also leads those who are being criticized to dismiss *all* criticism as invalid, when that's not the case. Clearly the manner in which the Zuma are run is a source of increasing frustration to the players who are having to deal with them. I would think that a review of why this is the case might be in order, along with some honest consideration of how the experience could be improved for everyone involved. After all, what's more important, the plot or the players? It sounds to me like the Zuma are losing the players. When players start throwing up their hands and talk about deleting their characters out of frustration, something isn't working. This is the point where I, as a GM running an RPG for some friends expressing this level of frustration, would be engaging in some serious introspection and reconsidering my entire campaign.

The problem is that no one that is complaining seems to want to offer an option to fix it that isn't one of the following


Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2012, 03:33:29 AM
Which doesnt seem likely because everyone is trying to buddy buddy up with the Daimons.
Not me. I was all ready to start shooting when Fang Fang turned his expedition into a monster hunting trip at the last minute.

But neither am I looking to poke the bear. Brance is content to leave them alone, if they're willing to leave him alone. But he's not interested in being their friend.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 03:38:42 AM
Not me. I was all ready to start shooting when Fang Fang turned his expedition into a monster hunting trip at the last minute.

But neither am I looking to poke the bear. Brance is content to leave them alone, if they're willing to leave him alone. But he's not interested in being their friend.

My observation, budding up with the Zuma is generally a great way to end up invaded by them. Sure you might get some short term power out of it, but eventually they will realise that someone is trying to manipulate them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Perth on January 30, 2012, 03:47:00 AM
But to be more specific, the thing that really set them off was when Hireshmont decided that he could convert Zuma and/or use Zuma imposters to call himself by some pompous name.

Oh yeah, what a ridiculous assertion, there might be some Zuma tribes people who belong to the largest and most widespread religion in the Maroccidens, that happened to be founded in a realm directly on Zuman borders. What a ridiculous thing to RP, Zuma people who might live in/around/near Terran and might belong to Triunism and respect Hireshmont as an elder of the religion? Bah!

Again, pretty funny how these mighty Zuma overlords would become so upset over a "pompous" name such as "Diviner," but never seem to care about other titles like, oh I don't know, "Chief Magistrate," "Mootgram," "King" or what have you. Sheesh, us little petty human ants are annoying, coming up with titles for ourselves all of sudden!

Oh, and wasn't that a message to Garrett anyways, not any Daimons?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 03:53:37 AM
Oh yeah, what a ridiculous assertion, there might be some Zuma tribes people who belong to the largest and most widespread religion in the Maroccidens, that happened to be founded in a realm directly on Zuman borders. What a ridiculous thing to RP, Zuma people who might live in/around/near Terran and might belong to Triunism and respect Hireshmont as an elder of the religion? Bah!

Again, pretty funny how these mighty Zuma overlords would become so upset over a "pompous" name such as "Diviner," but never seem to care about other titles like, oh I don't know, "Chief Magistrate," "Mootgram," "King" or what have you. Sheesh, us little petty human ants are annoying, coming up with titles for ourselves all of sudden!

Oh, and wasn't that a message to Garrett anyways, not any Daimons?

You think Garrret doesn't pass on messages?

The Overloads tend to believe the Zuma worship them and them alone. I imagine that if any Zuma tribes were worshipping another religion they might get very very cross. Least that was how things stood about four months ago. But anyway why just assume that their are such worshippers? Priest have the tools to find out if anyone in the region is a member of a religion.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 03:58:33 AM
What amazes me is that the viewpoints of the players who are forced to deal with the Zuma regularly by dint of proximity are so consistently ignored, dismissed, poo pooed, or outright attacked on these forums. The point of the Zuma, presumably, is to add something to the player experience and hopefully not solely to provide some GM with a toy to play with for his own amusement. Given that fact, I would think that player feedback would be taken seriously.

I recognize that the natural reaction to criticism, especially when said criticism is not always delivered in a constructive manner, is to become defensive. However, this tendency also leads those who are being criticized to dismiss *all* criticism as invalid, when that's not the case. Clearly the manner in which the Zuma are run is a source of increasing frustration to the players who are having to deal with them. I would think that a review of why this is the case might be in order, along with some honest consideration of how the experience could be improved for everyone involved. After all, what's more important, the plot or the players? It sounds to me like the Zuma are losing the players. When players start throwing up their hands and talk about deleting their characters out of frustration, something isn't working. This is the point where I, as a GM running an RPG for some friends expressing this level of frustration, would be engaging in some serious introspection and reconsidering my entire campaign.


This is exactly what I'm talking about. I could not have better described my problem with the situation better than this.

As Glaumring has said, every realm around the Zuma are walking on eggshells. This is not only a not fun way to play, but it prevents further player interaction. Terran, for example, can't get involved in either the Lurian or Madinan conflict, even if it wanted to (which it may or may not). Wouldn't that be a funner interaction for the whole island rather than an incredibly powerful force exerting itself whenever it pleases. Here are some of the Zuma's demands of humans around it so far:

-do not insult us (this includes perceived insults and insults from secondhand sources)

-do not take a region surrounding our realm without our permission

-do not, under any circumstance, enter our lands without our permission.

All these infractions have been met with violent force from the Zuma. Huge, indefensible invasions of 10s of thousands of CS.

This paralyzes the game for all the players around the Zuma, and this is coming from a player who has no problem with BM's sometimes slow place. I have a friend I recently introduced to the game and this whole Zuma thing is not leaving him impressed.

Here's an interesting thing to consider as well, who are the chief people complaining about the tactics of the GM controlled Zuma? Players within geographic proximity of the Zuma who have been feeling frustrated for weeks. Who has been defending them? Players who have never had to deal with the Zuma and, of course, the Zuma's human ambassador.


De Legro, you want a suggestion?

How about the Daimons stop acting with hairpin trigger against any perceived slight against them. As has been said before, they act psychotically, and are more like sensitive children with powerful weapons rather than "higher beings" or whatever they're supposed to be....

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 04:07:19 AM
You think Garrret doesn't pass on messages?

The Overloads tend to believe the Zuma worship them and them alone. I imagine that if any Zuma tribes were worshipping another religion they might get very very cross. Least that was how things stood about four months ago. But anyway why just assume that their are such worshippers? Priest have the tools to find out if anyone in the region is a member of a religion.

That message was meant for Garett, not the Daimons.

Part of the problem is Garett is an awful ambassador who often misinterprets the messages he sends to the Zuma.

The game states that many of the Zumalands inhabitants are Triunists. If the Daemons had a problem with this, they sure had pretty quiet way of showing it up until now. If I'm not mistaken, a large portion of Zuma inhabitants worship different religions, so what's wrong with having Vellos RP that Triunist Zuma approach Garett and inform him that Terran no longer wishes to speak to Garett. What part of that is a legitimate reason for the Zuma to go on warpath.

The thing you don't understand De-Legro, is that I'm not trying to convince you the Zuma are a bad idea. I'm telling you that *I* don't like it. Other people are also saying *they* dont like it. This isn't about you. This is about people expressing their feelings and whether or not you think those feelings are legitimate is irrelavant.

You can choose to not adress this apparently widespread discontent, but if the situation doesn't improve, I feel like the best thing for me to do would be to call it a day, give my character a nice end and thank BM for all the good memories.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 04:13:24 AM
So what you're telling me is, if the humans actually wanted to get rid of the Zuma, they have twice the CS?

That is 35000+ observable Daimons merely below Asylon. How many more thousands nearer to Terran or deeper inside Zuman lands? I'd say close to another 35000 if I wanted a blind estimate, I could be wrong the Daimons may only have around 50k Daimons in total..

And yes the Humans have more CS, but you have to take into account its scattered between 5 or 6 different kingdoms all varying degrees of miles away from eachother, all with their own internal problems, monster attacks and or certain nobles unable to make the movements like one single GM controlled army of 60000cs Zuma. It would take a week or so for just Astrum to show up for a fight, I merely included them to show that out of all of Dwilight our largest army is only a mere 20-30000cs. And that combined CS is only if every kingdom in the area agrees to fight.

I have absolutely no trust for the Zuma at all, zero. Before the incident I believed that they were of tolerable and at least could be held to their word and if things got bad we could at least see the reasons why things got bad. Instead, it doesn't matter you could have excellent relations, a long peace and interactions and then the next thing you know total hatred war and back-stabbing, its like fighting the AI in rome total war or CIV-II you just have to reach a certain point in the game and it doesn't matter how much work you put into your alliances and trade, the AI just flips on you.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 04:29:48 AM
That message was meant for Garett, not the Daimons.

Part of the problem is Garett is an awful ambassador who often misinterprets the messages he sends to the Zuma.



Yes I agree that Garret is a terrible ambassador, but you know what, he can be. His role is not a GM role, his character can do whatever it wants. Hopefully there is a RP basis for his actions, which from what little I can see is true. The real question is how long Garret can play his balancing act before his head is demanded by the Zuma.

Just like any other message we send in game, once it is out there you can't control who gets it.

The game states that many of the Zumalands inhabitants are Triunists. If the Daemons had a problem with this, they sure had pretty quiet way of showing it up until now. If I'm not mistaken, a large portion of Zuma inhabitants worship different religions, so what's wrong with having Vellos RP that Triunist Zuma approach Garett and inform him that Terran no longer wishes to speak to Garett. What part of that is a legitimate reason for the Zuma to go on warpath.

I'm not sure the Zuma GM has the ability to really see what his peasants follow. I would have to look again, but there are some weird limitations with regards to the info he can get about different things. Likely this would be the first he hears about other religions within his borders. Or it might have been that the GM felt that within the RP context of his Zuma they wouldn't worry about even thinking it was possible, until someone brings it up and forces them to address it.

The thing you don't understand De-Legro, is that I'm not trying to convince you the Zuma are a bad idea. I'm telling you that *I* don't like it. Other people are also saying *they* dont like it. This isn't about you. This is about people expressing their feelings and whether or not you think those feelings are legitimate is irrelavant.

You can choose to not adress this apparently widespread discontent, but if the situation doesn't improve, I feel like the best thing for me to do would be to call it a day, give my character a nice end and thank BM for all the good memories.

The thing YOU don't understand is that I'm offering my point of view. I have no control or influence over the Zuma GM, I don't know what the purpose of the Zuma is or the guidelines that Tom issued. I'm giving you my opinion as a player who has lived close to the Zuma, and who interacts with them still to this day.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 30, 2012, 04:37:59 AM
The problem is that no one that is complaining seems to want to offer an option to fix it that isn't one of the following
  • Make them so weak we don't really need to worry about them
  • Revel everything so they are completely game-able and we never set a foot wrong
  • Make them do nothing but send nice RP's

You're asking us to make suggestions when we have absolutely no knowledge of the Zuma's purpose. Without knowing why they were put on Dwilight in the first place, it's a bit hard to suggest options since anything we come up with might defeat their purpose. But for what it's worth here are my observations:

1. The Zuma are overpowered.

2. This is probably to deter us from getting it into our heads to try to destroy them, forcing us to instead deal with them on their terms.

3. This has resulted in a classic example of power-GMing, as the metaphorical GM has now placed into his plot an obstacle that can only be overcome by following his predetermined story arc, into which he is now railroading his players who, as it turns out, aren't actually that interested in it and would rather pursue their own plots but can't. This is resulting in unhappy players (surprise!).

You can argue that everything they do is a result of player actions, but the fact is that you have a significant population of players suffering and getting frustrated as the result of the actions of only a small handful of players over whose actions they have no control whatsoever. My advice: Stop using such a big damn hammer to hammer such small nails. Stop overreacting to things and punishing entire realms over the trivial actions of one character. Start ignoring the little things and let things settle down a bit. There's no reason that the Zuma *have* to go bat-!@#$ crazy every time someone casts a shadow in the wrong spot. They're swinging that big hammer around indiscriminately every time someone sneezes, it's forcing everyone to dive for cover every time they do, and people are starting to resent being forced to do that when most of them were minding their own business.

A choice was made to overpower the Zuma. Because of that fact, their power should be used sparingly at best, and preferably not at all. Some realm decides to attack the Zuma? Go ahead, eat them alive. They deserve it. Someone is having a bad day and says something more harshly than he intended? Find other ways to punish him, or if you must, just ignore it. Keep whipping out the big damn hammer and handing out massive punishment over such trivial things and the players are going to be *miserable* before long. Just read this thread and you'll find all kinds of evidence to that effect already, and that's just the players who post in these forums. How many players in Barca, Terran and Asylon that don't post here are feeling the same level of frustration? I know I would be if I had the misfortune to be next to the Zuma.

It needs to be recognized that there are a lot of players around the Zuma that just don't care about them. The Zuma need to find a way to stay engaged with the players who want to engage them while not railroading everyone else into doing so as well, which is exactly what this constant and uncompromising resort to force is doing. So there's my advice: Lay off the hammer for a while and start reserving it for serious provocations.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 04:41:52 AM
You're asking us to make suggestions when we have absolutely no knowledge of the Zuma's purpose. Without knowing why they were put on Dwilight in the first place, it's a bit hard to suggest options since anything we come up with might defeat their purpose. But for what it's worth here are my observations:

1. The Zuma are overpowered.

2. This is probably to deter us from getting it into our heads to try to destroy them, forcing us to instead deal with them on their terms.

3. This has resulted in a classic example of power-GMing, as the metaphorical GM has now placed into his plot an obstacle that can only be overcome by following his predetermined story arc, into which he is now railroading his players who, as it turns out, aren't actually that interested in it and would rather pursue their own plots but can't. This is resulting in unhappy players (surprise!).



Would you be surprised if there was no overarching long term story plot? Cause as far as I can work out from my interactions, there isn't. The Zuma do not appear to be a GM in the typical pen and paper sense, they don't exist to provide the complete framework and story for the players.


You can argue that everything they do is a result of player actions, but the fact is that you have a significant population of players suffering and getting frustrated as the result of the actions of only a small handful of players over whose actions they have no control whatsoever. My advice: Stop using such a big damn hammer to hammer such small nails. Stop overreacting to things and punishing entire realms over the trivial actions of one character. Start ignoring the little things and let things settle down a bit. There's no reason that the Zuma *have* to go bat-!@#$ crazy every time someone casts a shadow in the wrong spot. They're swinging that big hammer around indiscriminately every time someone sneezes, it's forcing everyone to dive for cover every time they do, and people are starting to resent being forced to do that when most of them were minding their own business.

A choice was made to overpower the Zuma. Because of that fact, their power should be used sparingly at best, and preferably not at all. Some realm decides to attack the Zuma? Go ahead, eat them alive. They deserve it. Someone is having a bad day and says something more harshly than he intended? Find other ways to punish him, or if you must, just ignore it. Keep whipping out the big damn hammer and handing out massive punishment over such trivial things and the players are going to be *miserable* before long. Just read this thread and you'll find all kinds of evidence to that effect already, and that's just the players who post in these forums. How many players in Barca, Terran and Asylon that don't post here are feeling the same level of frustration? I know I would be if I had the misfortune to be next to the Zuma.

It needs to be recognized that there are a lot of players around the Zuma that just don't care about them. The Zuma need to find a way to stay engaged with the players who want to engage them while not railroading everyone else into doing so as well, which is exactly what this constant and uncompromising resort to force is doing. So there's my advice: Lay off the hammer for a while and start reserving it for serious provocations.

Currently, where is the hammer being used? The problem being that within any realm there will be people that don't want to engage with the Zuma, just like in PeL there were people that didn't want a vocal few making enemies of everyone else in the area, and now they have to deal with the fallout. Like I said if the Zuma only interact with those that want it, they are pretty much relegated to writing RP's at the whim of nobility that show up. Maybe once and a while they can try to arrest and execute someone. Cause no matter WHAT the provocation, no matter how high up the hierarchy of the realm it comes from, there will be people affected that want nothing to do with the Zuma
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 30, 2012, 04:58:04 AM
Would you be surprised if there was no overarching long term story plot? Cause as far as I can work out from my interactions, there isn't. The Zuma do not appear to be a GM in the typical pen and paper sense, they don't exist to provide the complete framework and story for the players.

That's actually irrelevant, it was just easier to illustrate the point using that example. Whether there's a story or not, players are being railroaded into interacting with them.

Currently, where is the hammer being used? The problem being that within any realm there will be people that don't want to engage with the Zuma, just like in PeL there were people that didn't want a vocal few making enemies of everyone else in the area, and now they have to deal with the fallout. Like I said if the Zuma only interact with those that want it, they are pretty much relegated to writing RP's at the whim of nobility that show up. Maybe once and a while they can try to arrest and execute someone. Cause no matter WHAT the provocation, no matter how high up the hierarchy of the realm it comes from, there will be people affected that want nothing to do with the Zuma

The comparison is false. The Zuma are overwhelmingly powerful, and are not controlled by players. That makes it entirely different, particularly from the perspective of the people who are being negatively affected.

Ultimately you have a point, but I strongly suspect there is a happy medium somewhere between the incredibly heavy handed manner in which they are behaving now and your scenario where they are entirely passive.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 05:10:51 AM
PeL is a human controlled realm, no one cares about what nefarious deeds player vs player gets up to. If PeL went on a massive killing spree and wiped everything around it there would be a bit of complaining but in general many people would buck up and be aware of it being something players do and BM allows. I could also look back over PeLs history and land and see where their gold came from, their food came from and where their nobles came from. I could see that the kingdoms around it were beaten because of 'reasons' . I would also know that their armies 'starve' and their lands being looted affected them. In regards to the Zuma none of these rules apply, they live on crap land, they have huge armies composed of the humans who live on that crap land, but for some reason is able to field well equipped armies that are really strong composed of the same people 'humans' who live on the crap land. In all truth the Zuman lands should be complete !@#$e, they should be poor and starving and barely able to have massive armies.

Ok here is my theory, the Zumans can have massive armies because for each person killed on Bel, that soul is ressurected on Dwilight. So basically we are paying for whats going on in Bel and if they would stop fighting there the Dwilight Zumans wouldn't be able to recruit anymore slaves or whatever, because honestly I don't know and if I am right... It still sucks.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 30, 2012, 05:24:19 AM
I've visited the Zuma--sold a few hundred bushels of food, and made it out alive. Marchiavel and others from D'Hara have also managed to interact with the Zuma without pissing them off, and we're wondering why the Terrans and Barcans are so consistently dense when it comes to them--especially since it seems to be a recent stupidity, rather than a longer-term idiocy. The Barcans just had to go poke the Zuma with a stick, and ever since then, the Zuma have been pissed.

But there's no reason to discuss this in the forums. I'm going to have my character recommend amending the Treaty of the Marcoccidens to fix this whole scenario--you can read about it IG.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 05:35:36 AM
PeL is a human controlled realm, no one cares about what nefarious deeds player vs player gets up to. If PeL went on a massive killing spree and wiped everything around it there would be a bit of complaining but in general many people would buck up and be aware of it being something players do and BM allows. I could also look back over PeLs history and land and see where their gold came from, their food came from and where their nobles came from. I could see that the kingdoms around it were beaten because of 'reasons' . I would also know that their armies 'starve' and their lands being looted affected them. In regards to the Zuma none of these rules apply, they live on crap land, they have huge armies composed of the humans who live on that crap land, but for some reason is able to field well equipped armies that are really strong composed of the same people 'humans' who live on the crap land. In all truth the Zuman lands should be complete !@#$e, they should be poor and starving and barely able to have massive armies.

Ok here is my theory, the Zumans can have massive armies because for each person killed on Bel, that soul is ressurected on Dwilight. So basically we are paying for whats going on in Bel and if they would stop fighting there the Dwilight Zumans wouldn't be able to recruit anymore slaves or whatever, because honestly I don't know and if I am right... It still sucks.

Really, you could see the reasons for a war, even if those reasons where IC known by only a few character that never shared them? I mean right now you might even hear the public causes of the war, but can you KNOW they are the real ones? Can you know about every food trade, every under the table gold transaction? For all anyone knows Morek has been funnelling Solaria gold for weeks in a effort to establish SA in the south or something.

In terms of the army. Yeah there are some code limitations here. The Zuma have always RP'd having very few true daimons in the realm, thus armies composed of them would be odd. However they are a NPC faction and thus share code with the other NPC factions from BT. One thing to keep in mind, the human Zuma have been said to have been affected physically by their long term association with the Daimons. What affect that has on their required living conditions I don't know.

Lastly food, the Diamons have been buying as much as they can. If they don't need it, why waste all that gold on it? It surely wasn't because they loved the realms they bought it off. Some investigation into what they are doing with all that food might be interesting.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 05:41:26 AM
They are just funneling the food through a dimensional portal to Bel...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 06:43:09 AM
The problem is that no one that is complaining seems to want to offer an option to fix it that isn't one of the following
  • Make them so weak we don't really need to worry about them
  • Revel everything so they are completely game-able and we never set a foot wrong
  • Make them do nothing but send nice RP's

Sorry if this stuff has already been said.

Weaken them a little bit but not make them pathetic. And those in charge don't overreact to dumb stuff.

Simple put it is super annoying to get my army that I have been training for awhile destroyed because the Zuma overreacted and feel for a forged letter that some other random player did. Not to mention whatever they are overreacting to this time.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 06:51:33 AM
Sorry if this stuff has already been said.

Weaken them a little bit but not make them pathetic. And those in charge don't overreact to dumb stuff.

Simple put it is super annoying to get my army that I have been training for awhile destroyed because the Zuma overreacted and feel for a forged letter that some other random player did. Not to mention whatever they are overreacting to this time.

Did you see the part were I said the units they have and the way they behave is largely shared code with BT? Unfortunately so far as I can see this would require someone to spend the time to separate both factions so as not to affect the invasion currently running. Given that there have been several large changes recently, and there is stuff still to come I don't think such a thing is going to happen in the short term, supposing that Tom decides that it is necessary.

In terms of over reacting to dumb stuff? Well I don't see everything that goes on, but so far as I have seen, there is a lot more provocation occurring then the average knight or lord is seeing.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 06:57:50 AM
Did you see the part were I said the units they have and the way they behave is largely shared code with BT? Unfortunately so far as I can see this would require someone to spend the time to separate both factions so as not to affect the invasion currently running. Given that there have been several large changes recently, and there is stuff still to come I don't think such a thing is going to happen in the short term, supposing that Tom decides that it is necessary.

Well then have them not attack anyone until that gets fixed.

In terms of over reacting to dumb stuff? Well I don't see everything that goes on, but so far as I have seen, there is a lot more provocation occurring then the average knight or lord is seeing.

From a member of Terran and the moot the attacks against Terran seem that way. And even if their were some secret provocations, it would be happening by a super small minority ruining fun for a lot more. I know in BM you can't always get what you want, but on continents beside Beluaterra that is to be expected because of other players not GM's.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 07:00:49 AM
Well then have them not attack anyone until that gets fixed.

From a member of Terran and the moot the attacks against Terran seem that way. And even if their were some secret provocations, it would be happening by a super small minority ruining fun for a lot more. I know in BM you can't always get what you want, but on continents beside Beluaterra that is to be expected because of other players not GM's.

Sorry no, when a GM faction exists, it is reasonable to expect that sometimes it will be the GM faction that ruins your plans. BT is our INVASION continent, not our sole GM continent. I would love to know exactly what the Zuma faction exists for mind you, but while it exists it is reasonable to expect it will affect the continent.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 07:05:58 AM
Sorry no, when a GM faction exists, it is reasonable to expect that sometimes it will be the GM faction that ruins your plans. BT is our INVASION continent, not our sole GM continent. I would love to know exactly what the Zuma faction exists for mind you, but while it exists it is reasonable to expect it will affect the continent.

Okay well, fine. But my impressions of the reasons why the Zuma have been attacking Terrab terrible have been absolutely awful. Then because the Zuma are so strong that it would be near impossible for Terran and it's allies to stop them it is extremely annoying.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 07:11:13 AM
Okay well, fine. But my impressions of the reasons why the Zuma have been attacking Terrab terrible have been absolutely awful. Then because the Zuma are so strong that it would be near impossible for Terran and it's allies to stop them it is extremely annoying.

They could have been stopped. Force of arms is probably not the best way, but there was certainly scope for things to have gone very differently. The difference between what happened in Terran and Barca, and say what nearly happened in Iashalur and Kabrinskia should show that there are ways to resolve things even after the Zuma start to gear up.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 07:14:47 AM
We are not supposed to stop the Zuma or even be able to fight back. They are here to keep Dwilight a peaceful place that jumps and skitters everytime the Zuma move. In protest every kingdom on Dwilight should form a federation of unity.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 07:17:00 AM
They could have been stopped. Force of arms is probably not the best way, but there was certainly scope for things to have gone very differently. The difference between what happened in Terran and Barca, and say what nearly happened in Iashalur and Kabrinskia should show that there are ways to resolve things even after the Zuma start to gear up.

Except they don't really gear up they just attack and you are like "what the hell is going on?". And it doesn't matter if the root of the problem is them attacking for absolutely awful reasons. Terran has been talking about how the don't like the Zuma, but a huge common theme among all the letters is we totally don't want them to attack us. So what was said before somewhere that they are only attack if provoked is fine if it worked that way. Terran is trying to play where they don't want to fight the Zuma, and yet they do.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 07:28:02 AM
Your own realm members disagree here.

I can think of 3 things we've done that could set off a Zuma rage-loot just in the last 3 days.

Honestly, I'm not surprised by the most recent attacks. I'm just frustrated that I'm unable to speak to foreign allies during the incident. It's kind of making things a wee bit tricksy.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Andrew on January 30, 2012, 07:39:11 AM
I've got this totally crazy idea. Officially make Dwilight the island of "The GMs are here, and they have their own factions" and toss in another GM faction over in Balance's Retreat. Could make them undead or monsters, and then you could have the entire island involved in the "The GMs are too powerful" whining.

Honeslty though, GM controlled Undead in Balance's Retreat would be really fitting for the area if you ask me. All those mountains and the stronghold, it'd be really neat imo. The area is barely usable for anything else, and it'd make for an amusing buffer between the Lurias and Morek.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 07:51:53 AM
Your own realm members disagree here.

Doesn't mean that. Because I can think of reasons why, and they would all because the Zuma were being dumb and overreacting. Just reasons don't make them good ones.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 07:53:46 AM
Plus that still doesn't mean that we weren't talking about how we don't want them to attack us.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 30, 2012, 08:08:51 AM
I'll comment on a few things of mixed importance.

1. Somebody threw in a crack about Evangelical Christians. I would personally rather my own faith tradition were not used as a term signifying ignorance or stupidity.

2. The recent crisis was exacerbated by the message bug. Not being able to communicate with each other until the Zuma had ROTFLstomped half of our army was a bummer. I get it, yeah, you play through bugs... but the GM doesn't need to communicate to be effective. Furthermore, it deprived me of my opportunity to offend Haktoo again, and I really wanted to do it.

3. De-Legro: I think you need to be quiet. I don't say that in an angry way. I really don't But I think you would be well served by taking a step back and looking at, say, which players seem to like the Zuma as they are currently played, and which ones don't. The degree of satisfaction with the Zuma seems inversely related to the degree of actual meaningful contact with the Zuma.

4. It was asked how the Zuma could be improved. Somebody jokingly mentioned putting, Chenier, the current, GM, and myself all as GMs in one real. Yes. Do it. Well, not us specifically, but that's what the Zuma need: multiple, disagreeing, conflicted GMs. A GM faction that has similar problems to normal factions. Notably, this is how the Zuma were originally set up. The 1-GM (apparently) is not original to Dwilight. I think much of the problem would be solved if we had, say, 4 GMs.

5. I understand how Haktoo could get upset over the Triunist Zuma, kind of. Except I will note that anyone who says the Zuma actually worship the daimons is wrong. They don't. There is no Zuma religion. Even "Paganism" is almost nonexistent in Zuma lands. They are Elementalists, Triunists, Astroists... there is a little bit of Cordatus Bestiarium, which I guess worships the daimons or something, but they're a tiny minority. Any RP by the Zuma GM stating that the Zuma worship the daimons is directly falsified by simple game mechanics. Most of Zumaland is 70+% Triunist. So please, don't tell me this is the first Haktoo knew about this. The Zuma haven't worshipped the daimons in years.

6. Once I worked through frustration with the message system, figuring out this recent crisis wasn't hard. Hell, I intentionally provoked it. The Zuma make me bored. My plan for the Maroccidens was finished as soon as the Zuma decided to make the thing with Barca something more than "Give us food and an apology and we'll go away." Justw asn't going to happen. ICly, Hireshmont is very nearly a broken man. OOCly, I'm a bored player. So I decided to do the only logical thing: start pushing random buttons to see what happens. I didn't expect this big of a response quite this fast (and I didn't expect Haktoo to refuse to RP with the two ambassadors from Terran sent to meet him: this is hearsay, but they report Haktoo has being nonresponsive. Could be mistaken.), but I expected something to happen. I hardly even care what. But I don't really feel like sitting around preaching to peasants in Terran. I no longer believe it will be possible to achieve the things I wanted to with Hireshmont, so I've set new goals.

7. I will reiterate what MaleMaldives said: I can think of reasons for the Zuma to attack us. Heck, it's a mystery to me how they haven't found way more reasons to attack us than they have. But... just because I can think of things that might have provoked the Zuma doesn't mean I think it's justified. I had a pretty good idea sending Zuma Triunist monks as messengers would get the daimons all riled up. Because I know that the Zuma GM is a wee bit trigger happy. That doesn't mean I think that's a reasonable response; it just means it's a response that I could expect.

They could have been stopped. Force of arms is probably not the best way, but there was certainly scope for things to have gone very differently. The difference between what happened in Terran and Barca, and say what nearly happened in Iashalur and Kabrinskia should show that there are ways to resolve things even after the Zuma start to gear up.

This is laughable, by the way. Like, literally, I laughed.

Yes, if the Zuma have to march for, like, two weeks to get to you, there is room to resolve things other ways.

I'm sorry, De-Legro, I really think you need to take a step back. You aren't around the Zuma. How on earth are you so adamant about an issue with which you have so little contact, and concerning which you have so little knowledge? I don't go and argue Lurian politics, do I?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 08:23:24 AM
I actually like some things that Vellos wrote, though I can see some things are said in ignorance. And actually, it stems from the same problems that messed up 4th Inv on BT: You guys don't ask enough of each other.

I've said really clearly before that the Zuma's life is the daimons, that their faith is nothing of the form any human has seen, and that they really really do NOT want to preach their religions to the Zuma or bad stuff will happen. Funny how people forget the words of some insignificant human. Hm...that might be part of the daimons' plans actually...To get you to distrust Garret so that you keep screwing up. Dude, Garret gives solid advice. Usually what I've observed is that people distrust Garret or otherwise don't like him, so they do something that's not what he said, or they completely misinterpret what Garret wrote. Sure, it's not really that direct. What, you think I'll just go and say "Do this...and you're clear"? No, just how long do you think it took ME to figure out how to possibly survive a little among daimons? Like hell I'm going to just out and say "Hey follow me!" Because I am most certainly NOT on the humans' side, and I have no incentive to tell you in any simple way how to do things unless the daimons specifically ask me to. In those cases I sometimes just repeat their words pretty much verbatim.

Anyway, back to the part I liked about Vellos' post: The part where his plans for the Marroccidens was ruined or something.

Remember the whole thing about relocating? Look, at least you guys are still alive. You want to know what happened to, say, Thulsoma? Caerwyn? Everguard? And those were all eliminated by human realms.

Let's check...How many realms have the Zuma actually destroyed? My last count: 0.

So uh...I guess those guys from the actually destroyed realms are pretty miffed. Er, well, nothing to do about that, huh, since you know, in some cases they just got overwhelmed by a much stronger human force.

Now what, pray tell, is so really really really worthwhile about the location of the midwest that you really really really have to play there? But more importantly, I've noticed that in the past few months, Terran and Asylon (Well in Asylon's case, just their ruler was being stupid, and one of their dukes was apparently informed by a daimon why the king was being idiotic) have been being really dumb in their interactions.

Can I not suggest, Vellos, you also making Hireshmont step back, if you really want to reclaim a semblance of control over the situation? Reassess what you have been doing. Stop being so...dumb. You've shown yourself to be capable of intelligent work with the Zuma before, but recently it looks like you're getting reckless.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Perth on January 30, 2012, 08:36:11 AM
I've said really clearly before that the Zuma's life is the daimons, that their faith is nothing of the form any human has seen, and that they really really do NOT want to preach their religions to the Zuma or bad stuff will happen.

This:

 
5. I understand how Haktoo could get upset over the Triunist Zuma, kind of. Except I will note that anyone who says the Zuma actually worship the daimons is wrong. They don't. There is no Zuma religion. Even "Paganism" is almost nonexistent in Zuma lands. They are Elementalists, Triunists, Astroists... there is a little bit of Cordatus Bestiarium, which I guess worships the daimons or something, but they're a tiny minority. Any RP by the Zuma GM stating that the Zuma worship the daimons is directly falsified by simple game mechanics. Most of Zumaland is 70+% Triunist. So please, don't tell me this is the first Haktoo knew about this. The Zuma haven't worshipped the daimons in years.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 10:35:14 AM
I'll comment on a few things of mixed importance.

1. Somebody threw in a crack about Evangelical Christians. I would personally rather my own faith tradition were not used as a term signifying ignorance or stupidity.



Yeah I did. I'm also a Deacon of my local church. Doesn't detract from the fact that the majority of evangelical movements love to pick and choose bible verses, and present them with little or no context



3. De-Legro: I think you need to be quiet. I don't say that in an angry way. I really don't But I think you would be well served by taking a step back and looking at, say, which players seem to like the Zuma as they are currently played, and which ones don't. The degree of satisfaction with the Zuma seems inversely related to the degree of actual meaningful contact with the Zuma.

That doesn't make my opinion less valid, just that like all things it needs to be taken in context. Want to have a whine thread only for those that play near the Zuma, sure do that, just don't do it on the public forums and expect that no one else may post their opinion.

4. It was asked how the Zuma could be improved. Somebody jokingly mentioned putting, Chenier, the current, GM, and myself all as GMs in one real. Yes. Do it. Well, not us specifically, but that's what the Zuma need: multiple, disagreeing, conflicted GMs. A GM faction that has similar problems to normal factions. Notably, this is how the Zuma were originally set up. The 1-GM (apparently) is not original to Dwilight. I think much of the problem would be solved if we had, say, 4 GMs.

That would be nice, problem has always been finding people that are committed, who a trust able and who have the time. The committed issue is a big one, the Zuma are a multi year project, few people seem willing to commit to the time frame given the decided lack of any rewards.

I'm sorry, De-Legro, I really think you need to take a step back. You aren't around the Zuma. How on earth are you so adamant about an issue with which you have so little contact, and concerning which you have so little knowledge? I don't go and argue Lurian politics, do I?

For all you know Juan is bestest buds with Garret, or even possibly a Zuma lord and gets constant updates. The wonderful thing about instant contienent wide messaging, is it works for GM factions as well. Or you could assume that I have quite a few OOC contacts that provide me with a good view of what is going on. It even possible that since I was part of a plan to invade D'Hara at one point that we established spies through the Moot lands to further that agenda. Amazingly enough sometimes it is possible to be better informed about these thing even with the tyranny of distance.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 01:44:14 PM
This:

Uh, dude...not every single peasant that wanders into Zuma lands is a Zuma...

To expand on this a little, from what I can tell, the Zuma are inextricably bound to the daimons. If they break the "magical" bond they die, or something. That being said, there are peasants who move through Zuma lands (duh, new migration code?) but that doesn't mean they are Zuma.

An example in real life is for you to go to a foreign country. Just because you're there does not make you one of them. Then let's say you marry a native and have a kid. That kid would be mixed, and not necessarily have the same other values. Some cultures in this world probably have something like that (And since I'm no anthropologist or related human studies field, I shall refrain from going further here)

Then what if you preach to the Zuma? From what I can tell, they would categorically refuse your words. Stop thinking that the Zuma are just normal people you can talk to like normal. They have been bound to the daimons, serving them for like, hundreds of generations already. And most of all, you will notice that some of those daimon units are called "Zuma". Wonder for a moment at the significance of that.

So don't impose your thoughts on what is true. You can go ahead and try to RP whatever you want in the game. And Vellos has, regarding those "Zuma". But OOC, understand that it's not necessarily true at all, that there's the whole legacy to respect (or disrespect). Human realms sometimes cite ancient kingdoms as their basis. The Zuma are intended to be an established "ancient civilization". You can try to make it suit your tastes, but as well, you should accept that this is a two-way street. It sounds a lot like you're forgetting that a little here.

Anything you do, someone will respond to. And the response will not always be to your liking, just like how your actions might not be to their liking.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 30, 2012, 02:09:05 PM
2. The recent crisis was exacerbated by the message bug. Not being able to communicate with each other until the Zuma had ROTFLstomped half of our army was a bummer. I get it, yeah, you play through bugs... but the GM doesn't need to communicate to be effective. Furthermore, it deprived me of my opportunity to offend Haktoo again, and I really wanted to do it.

Yes, the recent message bug did cause some issues. I was unable to respond to the ambassadors when I would have liked to. This should be happening shortly. Also, due to the communication issue I did not continue the action as intended. one returned to my land, the other just progresses slowly.

4. It was asked how the Zuma could be improved. Somebody jokingly mentioned putting, Chenier, the current, GM, and myself all as GMs in one real. Yes. Do it. Well, not us specifically, but that's what the Zuma need: multiple, disagreeing, conflicted GMs. A GM faction that has similar problems to normal factions. Notably, this is how the Zuma were originally set up. The 1-GM (apparently) is not original to Dwilight. I think much of the problem would be solved if we had, say, 4 GMs.

That is not how the Zuma were originally set up. They were originally set up with just one GM, me. The other one joined a while later, after a lot of OOC discussion in the game and my request to then have them officially involved.

5. I understand how Haktoo could get upset over the Triunist Zuma, kind of. Except I will note that anyone who says the Zuma actually worship the daimons is wrong. They don't. There is no Zuma religion. Even "Paganism" is almost nonexistent in Zuma lands. They are Elementalists, Triunists, Astroists... there is a little bit of Cordatus Bestiarium, which I guess worships the daimons or something, but they're a tiny minority. Any RP by the Zuma GM stating that the Zuma worship the daimons is directly falsified by simple game mechanics. Most of Zumaland is 70+% Triunist. So please, don't tell me this is the first Haktoo knew about this. The Zuma haven't worshipped the daimons in years.

If you want me to create an in game religion to actually cover this I can, though then I would probably be accused of ruining the hard work of some people to get the influence of religion that they have in a number of regions. As has been covered in RP within the game, the agreement with SA from a short time ago for example, acknowledgement is given and there is no exclusion to other religions. This does not mean that the Zuma humans do not and cannot worship the Daimons as well.

6. Once I worked through frustration with the message system, figuring out this recent crisis wasn't hard. Hell, I intentionally provoked it. The Zuma make me bored. My plan for the Maroccidens was finished as soon as the Zuma decided to make the thing with Barca something more than "Give us food and an apology and we'll go away." Justw asn't going to happen. ICly, Hireshmont is very nearly a broken man. OOCly, I'm a bored player. So I decided to do the only logical thing: start pushing random buttons to see what happens. I didn't expect this big of a response quite this fast (and I didn't expect Haktoo to refuse to RP with the two ambassadors from Terran sent to meet him: this is hearsay, but they report Haktoo has being nonresponsive. Could be mistaken.), but I expected something to happen. I hardly even care what. But I don't really feel like sitting around preaching to peasants in Terran. I no longer believe it will be possible to achieve the things I wanted to with Hireshmont, so I've set new goals.

You intentionally provoked something that you know players within your realm do not want to happen. Other players within Terran, please make sure you read that and understand it. This was not some random act, this was your ruler intentionally doing as much as he could to ensure he would get a reaction. So can we lose the OOC bitterness about this and keep it IC instead.

The deal with Barca changed because a character in Barca chose to do something about it. The change was not something that I decided upon, it was instigated by a character in game. So it is a player character within the game that ruined your plans for the Maroccidens, not the Zuma.

I have already mentioned the lack of response to the ambassadors, it is not intentional, just bad timing. As for something 'this big', you have one character going to a location that (through an in game miscommunication) you requested him to go to. Use it to your advantage. Others have. Look at the recent offer that has been made to other realms (if you are aware of them, if not, it is not my place to mention any details).

Do you think you're being a bit selfish? You state that you are OOC bored so decided to stir up this action. Action that other players within your realm do not want to happen. Individuals within realms have started issues in the past, discussions with rulers have normally ensured that nothing happened from that. As a ruler character, you do not give the rest of your realm the chance to stop your actions having effect. It is partly your responsibility as ruler to help the realm have fun, and, from the reactions some of your realm mates have had in this thread, you are the cause of the things they complain about.


Yes, if the Zuma have to march for, like, two weeks to get to you, there is room to resolve things other ways.

Are Barca a two week march away?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 30, 2012, 06:57:28 PM
Yes, the recent message bug did cause some issues. I was unable to respond to the ambassadors when I would have liked to. This should be happening shortly. Also, due to the communication issue I did not continue the action as intended. one returned to my land, the other just progresses slowly.

I thought that might be the reason for the slowmarch to Chesney.

That is not how the Zuma were originally set up. They were originally set up with just one GM, me. The other one joined a while later, after a lot of OOC discussion in the game and my request to then have them officially involved.

My error. Still, I think multiple GMs would be a very good thing.

If you want me to create an in game religion to actually cover this I can, though then I would probably be accused of ruining the hard work of some people to get the influence of religion that they have in a number of regions. As has been covered in RP within the game, the agreement with SA from a short time ago for example, acknowledgement is given and there is no exclusion to other religions. This does not mean that the Zuma humans do not and cannot worship the Daimons as well.

Certainly the can.

But the game says they actually don't. You cannot be seriously saying there is some secret Zuma religion that was just never in the game until now. The game says that no such religion exists. It says they worship other things. This is textbook case of game mechanics trumping RP. If the game says they are Triunists, you cannot RP them as not being Triunists.

You intentionally provoked something that you know players within your realm do not want to happen. Other players within Terran, please make sure you read that and understand it. This was not some random act, this was your ruler intentionally doing as much as he could to ensure he would get a reaction. So can we lose the OOC bitterness about this and keep it IC instead.

Let's be clear. I didn't do this alone. I had over half a dozen players or characters in Terran contacting me or Hireshmont ICly and OOCly saying they were bored and wanted some action. We had a public, realm-wide discussion on the matter where everybody could chip in. The possible consequences were clearly explained.

The point, however, is that even our "best" option is vastly inferior to if the Zuma were less totalizing of a presence. Getting to choose whether you are killed by a horde of daimons or by the slow attrition of boredom and uninvolvement is not fun.

The deal with Barca changed because a character in Barca chose to do something about it. The change was not something that I decided upon, it was instigated by a character in game. So it is a player character within the game that ruined your plans for the Maroccidens, not the Zuma.

I know a player did it. But they could not have done it without the daimons. By virtue of being willing to play the GM, they were able to nullify any previous RPs or power structures that may have existed. Deus ex GMica.

I have already mentioned the lack of response to the ambassadors, it is not intentional, just bad timing. As for something 'this big', you have one character going to a location that (through an in game miscommunication) you requested him to go to. Use it to your advantage. Others have. Look at the recent offer that has been made to other realms (if you are aware of them, if not, it is not my place to mention any details).

Well of course we will try to use it to our advantage. Not saying we won't. But we might decide our advantage is to pretend like you are Overlord, and we live on Beluaterra. And then it will be Invasion-lite, like has been said the Zuma aren't supposed to be. If our characters ICly decide to go into "Invasion-mode," the only thing that will be able to separate the eastern part of Dwilight from Beluaterran-style play will be restraint by the GM. Not sure if our characters will have that response, it remains to be seen how the RPing turns out. But this is a problem with having so powerful a GM faction. You can't not be an overwhelming force around which all things revolve unless you intentionally restrict yourself and ameliorate your own strength, if other players decide to behave strategically.

Do you think you're being a bit selfish? You state that you are OOC bored so decided to stir up this action.

Selfish? We had a freaking vote about the matter. Almost every noble in Terran got a say in this, and support for our present course was practically unanimous. The complaints, IMHO, are not that we could not have expected a response like this, but that the existence of the Zuma as they presently are precludes the possibility of our pursuing any of the plotlines any of us would have liked to pursue.

Individuals within realms have started issues in the past, discussions with rulers have normally ensured that nothing happened from that. As a ruler character, you do not give the rest of your realm the chance to stop your actions having effect. It is partly your responsibility as ruler to help the realm have fun, and, from the reactions some of your realm mates have had in this thread, you are the cause of the things they complain about

Again, Hireshmont has not done anything in secret or without the full permission of Terran's Senate. You misunderstand the complaint.

Are Barca a two week march away?

And, to survive, they had to have every player that's been there investing in that realm for years stand aside and have the rulership put in the hands of someone trying to actively undermine an institution almost everyone else in the realm has been building up for literally years, and that individual was able to accomplish this by making their realm's direction contingent upon permission for actions from Garret Artemesia (like the whole thing with Flavia not joining the Moot until Garret told her to).

Again, Barca survived... and that doesn't make most of us optimistic about the Zuma's reasonability.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 07:03:20 PM
I am suddenly reminded of the "live as a rat/die as a lion" proverb...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on January 30, 2012, 08:39:53 PM
My error. Still, I think multiple GMs would be a very good thing.

I agree. The problem is though, as already mentioned by others, long term retention. We have seen the problems caused by agreements that Vates apparently made with people but, as I knew nothing about them, can do nothing about them. It would be easy to get someone keen and eager to help out for a while. It's not so easy to ensure they will stay around and not just end up frustrating people by leaving things half done.

But the game says they actually don't. You cannot be seriously saying there is some secret Zuma religion that was just never in the game until now. The game says that no such religion exists. It says they worship other things. This is textbook case of game mechanics trumping RP. If the game says they are Triunists, you cannot RP them as not being Triunists.

The game says there are Triunists within Zuma regions. It does not say they are born and bred Zuma that have abandoned their entire upbringing in servitude to the Daimons by turning to another faith. As for some secret religion. You've seen the paganism comments, that talk about "Many people are finding more solitude in the old local faiths". The whole way the Zuma are run is based around very local things so if you really need game mechanics to justify some of what I state, use that. Alternatively, I could have started a religion as soon as the Zuma came into existence on Dwilight and spent real life years preaching all across the western continent before any players actually arrived. I'm sure there would have been plenty of complaints if people moved in to find religion already firmly established everywhere.

Let's be clear. I didn't do this alone. I had over half a dozen players or characters in Terran contacting me or Hireshmont ICly and OOCly saying they were bored and wanted some action. We had a public, realm-wide discussion on the matter where everybody could chip in. The possible consequences were clearly explained.

The point, however, is that even our "best" option is vastly inferior to if the Zuma were less totalizing of a presence. Getting to choose whether you are killed by a horde of daimons or by the slow attrition of boredom and uninvolvement is not fun.

So, you have been attacked once for a situation that you didn't bring about yourselves and which the Daimons left you alone as soon as reasonable doubt was placed on the evidence they were given that caused them to attack you.

The Daimons have done nothing to you unless you instigated it. You are the ones that have chosen to sit in boredom. No one has stopped you from doing anything else whatsoever. If you were that bothered you could always have asked what would happen if you were to do certain things. If you are not getting involved in things, that is you're own doing.

I know a player did it. But they could not have done it without the daimons. By virtue of being willing to play the GM, they were able to nullify any previous RPs or power structures that may have existed. Deus ex GMica.
And, to survive, they had to have every player that's been there investing in that realm for years stand aside and have the rulership put in the hands of someone trying to actively undermine an institution almost everyone else in the realm has been building up for literally years, and that individual was able to accomplish this by making their realm's direction contingent upon permission for actions from Garret Artemesia (like the whole thing with Flavia not joining the Moot until Garret told her to).

This was an alternative choice provided by a player character that meant the Daimons left there and then. From what I can tell, if they'd just waited a few days more, they'd have delivered all 4 items that were asked for and we'd have left anyway. It was an alternative option that was provided by a player character and agreed as another option. How does that nullify any previous RP? That previous RP would still exist, still have happened.

Every player that's invested time had to stand aside? I think you're being overly dramatic there. The agreement that they chose to take up (remembering that, waiting a few more days they could have stuck with the original one) just meant that Flavia needed to be their ruler. They could have just put her in there as a figurehead as far as I'm concerned, kept absolutely everything the same within their realm apart from the fact that the 'official' ruler was someone else. Yes, I'm aware of the mechanics that could be done to change everything by the ruler. Did she do that? As for Flavia not joining the Moot until Garret told her, this is the first I am aware of that. Nothing to do with the Zuma.

Selfish? We had a freaking vote about the matter. Almost every noble in Terran got a say in this, and support for our present course was practically unanimous. The complaints, IMHO, are not that we could not have expected a response like this, but that the existence of the Zuma as they presently are precludes the possibility of our pursuing any of the plotlines any of us would have liked to pursue.

Again, Hireshmont has not done anything in secret or without the full permission of Terran's Senate. You misunderstand the complaint.

Clearly I do. Who told all the people in your realm that you are not able to do anything because of the Zuma being there? Who made that assumption and then passed it off as fact? Who came and questioned this with the Zuma (either IC or OOC). I'm just running the Zuma, I do not see everything that goes on within each realm. If there are serious OOC concerns the way to address them are constructively, not just letting the resentment build up before having a hissy fit when it's almost too late to do anything to address the concerns.

Again, Barca survived... and that doesn't make most of us optimistic about the Zuma's reasonability.

What?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 30, 2012, 08:45:59 PM
Yeah I did. I'm also a Deacon of my local church. Doesn't detract from the fact that the majority of evangelical movements love to pick and choose bible verses, and present them with little or no context



This is akin to saying that it's ok for me to say Jewish people are cheap, because, LOL, a majority of them are cheap.

It's using circular logic to reinforce stereotypes. You may not be a bigot, but by saying stuff like that you promote prejudices within our society. You haven't met the majority of evangelical movements so you don't have the authority to pass judgement on them. Isn't that what Jesus taught you Deacon?

Also, I can see there's no reason, for me at least, to continue this discussion. de legro has obviously made up his mind about Daemons and believes that anyone who doesn't like them is either wrong, misinformed, or not playing battle master right.

Arrtemesia defends the Daimons to his death because he's an addict for attention and, without a doubt in my mind, everyone would all too quickly forget about him if the Zuma were to disappear.

The Zuma GM I can sympathize with. He's trying his best and I think he's doing a good, if misdirected job. Honestly, I think you more than anyone should take a step back and say "I can be doing something better", you don't have to, but I think it's the right choice to make. Honestly, from me to you, I would try and get some other Zuma GMs to work with. Not to simply do your bidding mind you, but to have a genuine input on the actions of the Zuma. Don't tell me theres not enough dedicated players, hell, if BM has lots of something it's dedicated players. This would be a quick and easy way to make the Daimons feel more real, multi faceted, and "play withable".


Now they are just a wrench in the cog wheel of player on player interaction. They don't add anything, but they grind any action around them to a halt. I feel like I'm playing dungeons and dragons with s tyrannical game master whenever I interact with the Zuma....
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 09:03:11 PM
Oh my, vanKaya, my dear friend, when you start to levy out labels that generally looks...suspect.

I'll tell you why you wouldn't want to be me so people can stop being jealous of where I am, because I definitely know some people feel that way. I have no power in the realm. I can never have my character become a region lord, or marshal, or ruler, or banker, whatever. I cannot engage in my own ambitions. Yeah, I can say some things that are unrelated to the Zuma officially, but I can't do anything for my own benefit. And really, I haven't. If you disagree, do show exactly why it must be that I did something for personal gain, because I think most of the time hostility against me has nothing to do with really what I have done but rather who I am. What if I were, in fact, the Zuma GM, and you just flamed Artemesia in one breath and acted nicer to the Zuma GM in the next? I'm not saying I am, but remember, the GM is anonymous, and has taken steps to ensure this. Do not assume anything, so remember it's not good to be caught being two-faced.

So let's just say that Artemesia has not been around. Can I just come out now and tell you that it would be very likely that instead of now that people complain, that people would have had similar reasons to complain at least half a year ago already? Look, I know I am abrasive a lot of times, but dang guys, try to have at least some semblance of poise. If not, you only prove you're as bad as me, and if that's something you want to demonstrate, hey, that's your choice./
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 09:35:29 PM
Ok, where is this going now?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2012, 09:36:20 PM
The same place it's been going for the past 19 pages: nowhere.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 09:54:01 PM
20, Indirik.

Can we just bite our tongues and swallow our prides and do this in-game, in-character preferably, now? I'll be first to say that yes, I am often an abrasive person. Ok, sure, but I'm certainly not the only one, nor the worst, nor should I be the first any of you have encountered (If I am any of those, then I suppose I am envious of your sheltered life)

I admit that there are always flaws in everything, but that doesn't mean just the GM. While it seems as though I am only defending the daimons, I believe a more accurate term is I am attacking the complainers. I too, am in the dark in regards to the Zuma. I have no more incentive to be any more protective of them than any other among you in terms of what they do. I do not gain any perks for being part of the Zuma Coalition. I am not afraid to have Garret end up with his logical end. Don't try to insult me by telling me what will happen to my character. From the moment I was inducted into the realm I had a very clear idea about what would happen to him one day. So in the most polite way possible: Try not to make this about me. Much as some of you might think I'd love nothing more than this to be about me, unfortunately, for anything else, that might be true. For something like the Zuma, I'm not the one who is responsible for anything really. Sadly I cannot change anything, and whatever I say is coming in equal validity as any other outsider.

Now, point: Let's say that Vellos and the Zuma GM will never get along. Let's move on. Play the game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2012, 09:58:10 PM
20, Indirik.
Aww crap... My post rolled the page count. :P
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 10:06:17 PM
Play the game... And remember , everything said here can and will be held against you ingame...  8) muhahahaha you are all doomed... Except De-Legro because he is the Zuma gm anyways.

Ok, im joking... Am I?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 10:27:03 PM
I would still like to debate how the reasons why the Zuma have attacked Terran have been absolutely awful.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 10:31:49 PM
o.O

Actually, I'm curious myself as to what constitutes a "good" reason for attacking another realm. From what I've seen in this game a lot of times the reasons given were invented or somewhat altered half truths that covered the true reason which often degenerated to: I want those regions/that realm destroyed.

At least from what I've seen of the Zuma (And remember, I'm in the dark like you all) their actions are pretty clear. You do, they react. Most of the time, the reaction is not nice. Because daimons aren't nice.

That schoolyard bully wasn't nice either. He'd beat you up for your lunch money even if you tried giving it to him. And if YOU were that bully, then you'd know even better.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 30, 2012, 10:34:57 PM
For those of us not involved in the incident and thus not having firsthand knowledge of it, maybe you can tell us why you think you were attacked? All I have seen you post is that you think the reasons are lame, but not really explaining what you think those reasons are. (To be fair, I may have missed a post where you did explain it. It's a long thread...)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 10:39:18 PM
Here are some good reasons:

Attacking a realm to take their land. Attacking a realm because they are clearly planning for your realm's destruction. They are letting their infiltrators sabotage your realm.

Here is a bad one:

Getting fooled by a forged letter when it could have been easily verified to have been fake.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on January 30, 2012, 10:46:35 PM
Getting fooled by a forged letter when it could have been easily verified to have been fake.

You're not very good at correctly defining the issue.

The reason for that war was not "getting fooled by a forged letter". It was "believing someone had called the Zuma horrible names."

And as for the verification...how long did you lot spend trying to track down Terrence, when it was clearly stated from the outset that you just needed to torture someone who was in the 'moot till you saw the original letter, then provide that torture report?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 30, 2012, 10:50:49 PM
There was a bug preventing Terrence from getting my letters, once it was fixed it was all good.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 10:52:04 PM
The reason for that war was not "getting fooled by a forged letter". It was "believing someone had called the Zuma horrible names."

Yeah and when what they believe is a lie, that is getting fooled.

40 so members of the moot saying it is forged should be good enough. Not to mention Garret who is ambassador for the Zuma was in the moot and could see the real letter. The Zuma also attacked first before inquiring about that stuff. So either way about the verification part about it we got attacked over it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 10:54:14 PM
You're not very good at correctly defining the issue.

The reason for that war was not "getting fooled by a forged letter". It was "believing someone had called the Zuma horrible names."

And as for the verification...how long did you lot spend trying to track down Terrence, when it was clearly stated from the outset that you just needed to torture someone who was in the 'moot till you saw the original letter, then provide that torture report?

Or try to convince the Zuma that there are ways other then torture to ensure humans tell the truth?

Play the game... And remember , everything said here can and will be held against you ingame...  8) muhahahaha you are all doomed... Except De-Legro because he is the Zuma gm anyways.

Ok, im joking... Am I?

Yeah you got me. The fact I've only been playing the game from late 2008 not withstanding. I'm so awesome I was the Zuma GM before I even knew the game existed.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 10:57:36 PM
Yeah and when what they believe is a lie, that is getting fooled.

40 so members of the moot saying it is forged should be good enough. Not to mention Garret who is ambassador for the Zuma was in the moot and could see the real letter. The Zuma also attacked first before inquiring about that stuff. So either way about the verification part about it we got attacked over it.

Why, what could the Moot offer to prove it? Oh yeah a copy and paste of the message, the same thing that Terrance supposedly offered. Lots of people offering it doesn't mean its not a cover up does it, just means they might be organised. And Garret? Make up your minds, in one breath you argue the Zuma should not trust him, in the next that the Zuma should believe him. It is GARRET we are talking about. The Zuma may find him useful, but they are likely to trust him about as much as any noble trusts him.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 30, 2012, 11:06:28 PM
Confessions from a bunch of members from the moot should override the one dude with the forged letter. At least to prevent them from attacking right away. My opinion of what garret's role should be is just a straight up ambassador that relays messaged between other players and those in charge of the Zuma. He is the ambassador and if players can't use him to tell the Zuma stuff then the Zuma is even more flawed.

The way the Zuma attacked Terran over that forged letter was way to trigger happy especially coming from GM's.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: fodder on January 30, 2012, 11:11:25 PM

That is not how the Zuma were originally set up. They were originally set up with just one GM, me. The other one joined a while later, after a lot of OOC discussion in the game and my request to then have them officially involved.

huh? you played the zuma gm who kept talking about fatmilaks and bols (with my character)? and then got nowhere and disappeared for a while (dropped out of the game?)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on January 30, 2012, 11:16:15 PM
Confessions from a bunch of members from the moot should override the one dude with the forged letter. At least to prevent them from attacking right away. My opinion of what garret's role should be is just a straight up ambassador that relays messaged between other players and those in charge of the Zuma. He is the ambassador and if players can't use him to tell the Zuma stuff then the Zuma is even more flawed.

The way the Zuma attacked Terran over that forged letter was way to trigger happy especially coming from GM's.

I don't think it is fair to comment on the relevance of the reasons they have for war. After all, we don't do it for any other realm. Some reasons are good, some are bad, some are completely made up. All's fair in love and war.

Now, the sentiment I think many people have is that given the overpowering of the Zuma, they should be held to an higher standard than other players. I agree with this. This applies to SMA behaviour, to the obligation to create fun for other parties, and to survival considerations (it is less acceptable for the Zuma to seek the complete destruction of a human realm than it would be for another human realm). However, it does not follow that the Zuma must follow a "clear" kind of logic, or that they should be convinced of the things that you are convinced of.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 30, 2012, 11:25:55 PM
Confessions from a bunch of members from the moot should override the one dude with the forged letter. At least to prevent them from attacking right away. My opinion of what garret's role should be is just a straight up ambassador that relays messaged between other players and those in charge of the Zuma. He is the ambassador and if players can't use him to tell the Zuma stuff then the Zuma is even more flawed.

The way the Zuma attacked Terran over that forged letter was way to trigger happy especially coming from GM's.

Confessions from a bunch of members from the moot should override the one dude with the forged letter. At least to prevent them from attacking right away. My opinion of what garret's role should be is just a straight up ambassador that relays messaged between other players and those in charge of the Zuma. He is the ambassador and if players can't use him to tell the Zuma stuff then the Zuma is even more flawed.

The way the Zuma attacked Terran over that forged letter was way to trigger happy especially coming from GM's.

But WHAT does the GM have to know the letter was forged? That is my question. When all you are getting are two copy and pasted messages from two different sources, then what metric do you have to decided which is true, remembering that the Zuma don't distinguish between advys and nobles, and care little for our power structures? And what is this talk about attacking right away? You guys were given time to sort things out, not much time I will agree but there were ways to extend those deadlines.

In terms of being an ambassador, what do the ambassadors in our realms do? Do all of them pass on letters exactly? Do they not attempt to use their role to their own advantage? Let me point it out again, Garret is not a GM character, the player is NOT part of the Dev Team. His character is his to play the way he wants. If he is failing in his duties then convince the Zuma of that IG and let them sort it out. A good place to start would be finding out from the Zuma what they think the role of ambassador means, it might be something quite different from what human realms think.

huh? you played the zuma gm who kept talking about fatmilaks and bols (with my character)? and then got nowhere and disappeared for a while (dropped out of the game?)


Was that Vates? Vates was the second GM who started later and then left. It was a pity because Vates had a lot of interaction with the players, didn't always make it clear that he was rather unique among the masters, and people are still basing much of their knowledge about the Zuma on Vates.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 30, 2012, 11:42:33 PM
Something I'm wondering is where people got the idea that the Zuma were ever "honorable" or whatever. Garret became the speaker for the speaker (Vates, supposedly). You might not trust Garret (lol, why not? It's ironic too, especially since that very distrust has led some people to make decisions that put them in worse places than if they had actually trusted Garret completely and let him do everything for them. No one wants that though because they think Garret's untrustworthy. Could be..you know...something the daimons have picked up on and are using as well...)

The reason I say that is because some people seem to trust the other GM's words for some reason. Like, Vates is held in such high regard by people. I really question why though. Like, what made you think he was a "good guy"? >_>
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2012, 12:03:28 AM
I agree. The problem is though, as already mentioned by others, long term retention. We have seen the problems caused by agreements that Vates apparently made with people but, as I knew nothing about them, can do nothing about them. It would be easy to get someone keen and eager to help out for a while. It's not so easy to ensure they will stay around and not just end up frustrating people by leaving things half done.

As has been noted by several people, most of this discussion is just going nowhere. As much as I would like to believe that debating most of the points with you further might ultimately lead to some reflections which might improve gameplay in the future, I just don't, not on this particular issue. So I am not going to make a detailed reply to most of your post; again, not out of angry frustration, but basically because I don't think it'll be productive

However, this comment can be productively dissected.

It begs the question: why do we even want long-term GMs? We don't need to have the same human player be ruler for 5 years IRL, why have the same GM?

Why not have, say, 4 or 5 GMs. They take shifts. 2 or 3 play at a time, for a few months. Then, they have to "return to the underworld" to rejuvenate themselves or something. Like, Dwilight's air is toxic or something. I dunno. Some kind of RPed hand-waving.

Thus, you could have less monolithic GMing, more diverse RPing, less burden on GMs, and solve the problem of inconsistent GMing.

What? Solve inconsistent GMing by introducing divisiveness among GMs? How?

Simple:
1. Don't let the GMs know each others' main accounts. So, for example, if Chénier and I are GMs, don't have it so that, if we send an OOC message, it says "Lyman Stone." Sure, we might figure it out... but maybe not.

2. When people realize that the GMs ARE IN FACT DIVIDED, it will alter the entire strategic framework for the parts of Dwilight affected by the Zuma. That is, the problem with inconsistent GMing is that GMs are generally expected to be consistent.

But what if we change the expectation? A plausible way to change that expectation while simultaneously fixing several other root problems with the Zuma would be to have a rotating pool of GMs with overlapping "terms" so they can kind of see what's going on with each other. The RP potential would also be awesome. "Ah, yes, it's the Era of Haktoo now... (3 months later)... ah, behold, fire from the volcano, the Era of Vates is beginning..." And, knowing that each Daimon has fairly consistent personalities, but that they might plausibly be played against each other, would help to add some of the dynamism the Zuma currently lack.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: fodder on January 31, 2012, 12:07:24 AM

Was that Vates? Vates was the second GM who started later and then left. It was a pity because Vates had a lot of interaction with the players, didn't always make it clear that he was rather unique among the masters, and people are still basing much of their knowledge about the Zuma on Vates.
could be... it wasn't haktoo i don't think. something wandered down to madina but we couldn't get anywhere due to me attempting very hard not to say anything that might mean something bad for us.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Perth on January 31, 2012, 12:10:41 AM
But WHAT does the GM have to know the letter was forged? That is my question. When all you are getting are two copy and pasted messages from two different sources, then what metric do you have to decided which is true, remembering that the Zuma don't distinguish between advys and nobles, and care little for our power structures?

How about: The actions of GM forces of 10's of thousands of combat strength just shouldn't be predicated whatsoever upon ANY copy and pasted messages?

And what is this talk about attacking right away?

As in: Daimon units of 10,000 CS regularly SIT in regions BORDERING Terran regions. As in: when they decided to attack, they are literally IN our regions in 1 turn.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 12:16:38 AM
How about: The actions of GM forces of 10's of thousands of combat strength just shouldn't be predicated whatsoever upon ANY copy and pasted messages?

As in: Daimon units of 10,000 CS regularly SIT in regions BORDERING Terran regions. As in: when they decided to attack, they are literally IN our regions in 1 turn.

Yet time was given to sort things out BEFORE they decided to invade. Better then what we did in Solaria, where the first PeL really knew things were up was when out army started to move. Also from my understanding, the copy and pasted message was just a starting point. The result that eventuated came from what transpired after that event.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 12:20:16 AM
As has been noted by several people, most of this discussion is just going nowhere. As much as I would like to believe that debating most of the points with you further might ultimately lead to some reflections which might improve gameplay in the future, I just don't, not on this particular issue. So I am not going to make a detailed reply to most of your post; again, not out of angry frustration, but basically because I don't think it'll be productive

However, this comment can be productively dissected.

It begs the question: why do we even want long-term GMs? We don't need to have the same human player be ruler for 5 years IRL, why have the same GM?

Why not have, say, 4 or 5 GMs. They take shifts. 2 or 3 play at a time, for a few months. Then, they have to "return to the underworld" to rejuvenate themselves or something. Like, Dwilight's air is toxic or something. I dunno. Some kind of RPed hand-waving.

Thus, you could have less monolithic GMing, more diverse RPing, less burden on GMs, and solve the problem of inconsistent GMing.

What? Solve inconsistent GMing by introducing divisiveness among GMs? How?

Simple:
1. Don't let the GMs know each others' main accounts. So, for example, if Chénier and I are GMs, don't have it so that, if we send an OOC message, it says "Lyman Stone." Sure, we might figure it out... but maybe not.

2. When people realize that the GMs ARE IN FACT DIVIDED, it will alter the entire strategic framework for the parts of Dwilight affected by the Zuma. That is, the problem with inconsistent GMing is that GMs are generally expected to be consistent.

But what if we change the expectation? A plausible way to change that expectation while simultaneously fixing several other root problems with the Zuma would be to have a rotating pool of GMs with overlapping "terms" so they can kind of see what's going on with each other. The RP potential would also be awesome. "Ah, yes, it's the Era of Haktoo now... (3 months later)... ah, behold, fire from the volcano, the Era of Vates is beginning..." And, knowing that each Daimon has fairly consistent personalities, but that they might plausibly be played against each other, would help to add some of the dynamism the Zuma currently lack.

So long as some time was spent forumlating and recording a base for the new GM's to work from this could work. There is some division between the existing Zuma Masters, and yes it is contrived because the same player controls them all, but in my experiance he has done a reasonable job of keeping each Master true to the bio he set up from the start. I think most people have missed the factional stuff because there is so much focus on Garret and Haktoo.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 12:40:44 AM
Well Terran now gets to talk to Swift Claw. It's now up to them whether they get something from a daimon not named Haktoo, or blow it.

It's not impossible either. I believe that the new Barca ruler successfully talked to Screamer. And I am impressed. Garret is not keen on getting near Screamer, you see.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Perth on January 31, 2012, 12:52:51 AM
Garret is not keen on getting near Screamer, you see.

Maybe Garrett has a bit of sense left in him, after all.

*shudders*
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 12:58:48 AM
Maybe Garrett has a bit of sense left in him, after all.

*shudders*

Blasphemy.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 12:59:51 AM
Yet time was given to sort things out BEFORE they decided to invade. Better then what we did in Solaria, where the first PeL really knew things were up was when out army started to move. Also from my understanding, the copy and pasted message was just a starting point. The result that eventuated came from what transpired after that event.

This is false. My character was attacked twice in Vassar in the forged letter debacle. The first time they just rushed in and everyone in Terran was like what is going on? We were like Zuma what the hell is going on? Then the Zuma were like we got this letter and believe it to be true. Then everyone was like umm it is clearly fake Garret can see it is fake. They retreated temporally, but then did the bs we need verification crap and since the was dumb and took awhile they can back and killed my new army in Vassar. So I think you don't know about the first one that they did.

What ever reasons there are for the Zuma they are making the game not fun for the players in Terran(at least for me and a couple others). If fixing that means getting rid of them completely then so be, because what is the point of a GM run group that makes the games not fun for players. Or just make them less trigger happy and less strong(and since that takes time to fix just don't have them attack anyone).
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 01:31:54 AM
Can someone help me out here, because I don't think people have been listening to me the past...oh how many times I've said the following:

If you don't want the Zuma to attack you then shut up and don't get involved with them. Deny anything and everything, and make sure everyone knows you have nothing to do with the Zuma.

Would anyone who knows how to survive among daimons like to chip in and confirm that what I just said is in fact true?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 01:40:14 AM
Can someone help me out here, because I don't think people have been listening to me the past...oh how many times I've said the following:

If you don't want the Zuma to attack you then shut up and don't get involved with them. Deny anything and everything, and make sure everyone knows you have nothing to do with the Zuma.

Would anyone who knows how to survive among daimons like to chip in and confirm that what I just said is in fact true?

They attacked Terran because of the forged letter before they even said anything about it. Everyone in Terran was shocked and didn't know what was going on. So they don't give you a chance to deny stuff.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 31, 2012, 01:53:39 AM
Can someone help me out here, because I don't think people have been listening to me the past...oh how many times I've said the following:

If you don't want the Zuma to attack you then shut up and don't get involved with them. Deny anything and everything, and make sure everyone knows you have nothing to do with the Zuma.

Would anyone who knows how to survive among daimons like to chip in and confirm that what I just said is in fact true?

We dont want to bother the Zuma, thats why we made Peace with them. We were happy with live and let live. Then we lost land to the Zuma, asked for its return, was told to shut up, and have basically been living in fear that the Zuma are going to come stomp the rest of our kingdom for some lame reason. We worked hard to build our kingdom, the Zuma probably not so much with their 35000cs army.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 01:55:59 AM
Ever try saying "Sorry, almighty daimons. But we really didn't write that. Please believe us oh mighty daimons."

In Glaumring's case: Oh my, Haktoo and Garret both saw how you responded. You were all like "Hey, the treaty? Hello?" And that was a dead end. Should've noticed that.

I will once more repeat something I said before: Is it so hard to just say sorry? Even if you're not wrong, even if you think you have nothing to apologize for, when you deal with superiors just do it because it might make them a bit happier.

But I believe very few people have ever actually had the humility to say "Sorry, my mistake". Believe it or not, Garret has. I believe Flavia has as well.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 02:07:36 AM
Ever try saying "Sorry, almighty daimons. But we really didn't write that. Please believe us oh mighty daimons."

In Glaumring's case: Oh my, Haktoo and Garret both saw how you responded. You were all like "Hey, the treaty? Hello?" And that was a dead end. Should've noticed that.

I will once more repeat something I said before: Is it so hard to just say sorry? Even if you're not wrong, even if you think you have nothing to apologize for, when you deal with superiors just do it because it might make them a bit happier.

But I believe very few people have ever actually had the humility to say "Sorry, my mistake". Believe it or not, Garret has. I believe Flavia has as well.

Well i'm not in charge of that for my realm. But the players shouldn't have to do that for the GM's doing a bad job.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 02:08:58 AM
ICly apologizing. Because, you know, sometimes things can be unfair. If you've lived life you'd know that quite well.

OOCly I don't decide what you care to do about your OOC complaints. Nor do I particularly care.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Chenier on January 31, 2012, 02:17:35 AM
We dont want to bother the Zuma, thats why we made Peace with them. We were happy with live and let live. Then we lost land to the Zuma, asked for its return, was told to shut up, and have basically been living in fear that the Zuma are going to come stomp the rest of our kingdom for some lame reason. We worked hard to build our kingdom, the Zuma probably not so much with their 35000cs army.

Indeed, that is all we want. "Live and let live". Used to care for the Zuma, wanted to be friends with them, etc, etc. But the poor response rate, erratic behaviour and unpredictable aggressiveness promoted the "let's just deal with them as little as possible" attitude. Perhaps it's intended. Perhaps it's realistic. It's still frustrating when we see others provoke them and have the Zuma hordes act like a swarm of moronic dupes that just want to bash everything like cavemen because they are not happy.

They don't emanate an aura of "mystical" or "alien". They emanate an aura of stupid. They were deceived, and how do they react? They do exactly what the deceivers wanted them to do. I don't care how many times you repeat the Zuma are "alien", that just translates as "stupid" in my book. And every "RP" waves around those events were lame half-assed excuses to justify the already lame behavior.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 02:19:18 AM
ICly apologizing. Because, you know, sometimes things can be unfair. If you've lived life you'd know that quite well.

OOCly I don't decide what you care to do about your OOC complaints. Nor do I particularly care.

Well aren't you the mature debater. If you don't care then don't bother messaging back.

If the GM's are doing a bad job and no one tells them then nothing would ever get fixed. It is just my opinion that they are in this particular case, and I don't think I have been doing it that rudely.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 31, 2012, 02:30:20 AM
Glaumring had no reason to say sorry, he asked for land to be returned under the treaty and was told he was arrogant and the treaty they had sucked. If it happened in reverse and the Zuma asked I would have honoured the treaty unless we had a long history of animosity, we didnt in this case, so we feel bullied by the 35000cs on our borders. What can we even hope to do about it? Dwilight is for the players the map was set up with finite cities, to say just stay away from the zuma or live in Morek the whole game because its safer kills the adventure of Dwilight and the colonial expansions of a vast land.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 02:37:27 AM
Glaumring had no reason to say sorry, he asked for land to be returned under the treaty and was told he was arrogant and the treaty they had sucked. If it happened in reverse and the Zuma asked I would have honoured the treaty unless we had a long history of animosity, we didnt in this case, so we feel bullied by the 35000cs on our borders. What can we even hope to do about it? Dwilight is for the players the map was set up with finite cities, to say just stay away from the zuma or live in Morek the whole game because its safer kills the adventure of Dwilight and the colonial expansions of a vast land.

What would you do if Aurvandil did the same with their 25k army? Or all of SA realms insisted they no longer wished to honour the treaty and they had som 50k CS willing to settle the matter?

Think on this. We KNOW that the Zuma never used to field armies of this size. So there are two ways to think abou this. Did they always have the resources to and didn't bother. Or has something changed in the last 6 months or so that would have affected their resources?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 31, 2012, 03:15:01 AM
What would you do if Aurvandil did the same with their 25k army? Or all of SA realms insisted they no longer wished to honour the treaty and they had som 50k CS willing to settle the matter?

Think on this. We KNOW that the Zuma never used to field armies of this size. So there are two ways to think abou this. Did they always have the resources to and didn't bother. Or has something changed in the last 6 months or so that would have affected their resources?

We wouldn't care if it is PVP related. C'mon I am 35 years old and have played every roleplaying game from D&D first edition way back in 1985 to Quake and Doom all the way up to UO, It's not like I am crying about the Zuma because I have never dealt with griefers or game mechanics or PVP or anything of that matter. I came here for PVP/RP with other players bound by the same rules with different histories and stories. The Zuma are a GM controlled army that are not bound by the same rules , that can field huge armies and are basically hostile and consider humans to be ants and treaties and whatnot like 'peace' mean nothing to them. Its not a big deal. I knew the Zuma were dangerous since the start of Dwilight, that is why Asylon worked so hard to make good relations with the Zuma and to ignore and respect them. Later on we found out that it doesn't matter the Zuma do not care and basically if you don't like it pack up your kingdom and move over to the east continent and settle in the infinite amount of empty cities or join one of the 5 kingdoms in the east and hang out there with all 56 nobles that would be packed into each realm...Boring.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 31, 2012, 03:33:15 AM
How many of you are starting to suspect De Legro is the Zuma GM.....

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 03:35:52 AM
How many of you are starting to suspect De Legro is the Zuma GM.....

A simple check of my account would show I wasn't playing BM when the Zuma first started. A more in depth consideration would be, if I had access to the Zuma GM forum account, I would post less of this stuff under my own account.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Eithad on January 31, 2012, 04:03:28 AM
I don't actually know anything about the Zuma, but GMs have always said Daimons still are bounded by the same rules and game mechanics. Its not like they can just do whatever they want.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 04:09:21 AM
I don't actually know anything about the Zuma, but GMs have always said Daimons still are bounded by the same rules and game mechanics. Its not like they can just do whatever they want.

Not exactly. They are bound by their own rules and game mechanics. Just as the monsters had their own system while you were a part of that invasion, you back stabbing scum :)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 04:14:20 AM
How many of you are starting to suspect De Legro is the Zuma GM.....

No, but he like others (such as myself) have dealt with them some in the past and happen to realize a bit on how to act around them. At least I have learned from my mistakes in that area so that I won't make them again.

Believe it or not, De-Legro is actually trying to help you without blatantly telling you what to do, instead of just lecturing you.

The point is that the Zuma have been on Dwilight since the beginning and their location was known at least relatively for a while before people actuallly settled right on their border.

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but all of my knowledge and experience of them suggests that if you just look at the map of Dwilight and pretend that every region that the Zuma hold and every region they touch simply didn't exist and played accordingly, then you would pretty much not have to deal with the Zuma. If members of your realm (especially your rulers) choose to not do so, or someone chooses to interact with them, that is a different story. Either punish those characters or take the consequences, or simply move elsewhere. The Zuma are bounded by certain game mechanics which limit their power, and as far as I can tell they also only respond to human interactions instead of simply killing for no reason.

On another note: I'm fairly sure that if Terran for instance wanted to involve itself in the Luria affair and simply ignore the Zuma during that time and proceed not to taunt or insult them, they would be perfectly capable of doing so without the Zuma interference.

And, a good point was made that reasons for war aren't always the ones that are publicly stated. It is quite possible that your character is simply unaware of the real reasons or leaders didn't respond to the real reasons. PeL certainly has seen plenty of this recently.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 31, 2012, 04:43:07 AM
And, a good point was made that reasons for war aren't always the ones that are publicly stated.
Give this man a cookie.

To expand on this, the reasons that are stated my be believed by those stating them, but nevertheless be completely false. Look at what happened when Caerwyn declared war on Astrum. Several players have stated that they believed the reasons they gave, yet they were completely fictitious. Which doesn't mean they were lies, they were just poorly informed or misled.

The reasons for a war will rarely, if ever, be declared by both sides as justified. That would require both sides to be viewing the incident from the same point of view, and both being reasonable and logical. And if that was the case, there probably wouldn't have been a war in the first place.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 04:56:46 AM
Give this man a cookie.

To expand on this, the reasons that are stated my be believed by those stating them, but nevertheless be completely false. Look at what happened when Caerwyn declared war on Astrum. Several players have stated that they believed the reasons they gave, yet they were completely fictitious. Which doesn't mean they were lies, they were just poorly informed or misled.

The reasons for a war will rarely, if ever, be declared by both sides as justified. That would require both sides to be viewing the incident from the same point of view, and both being reasonable and logical. And if that was the case, there probably wouldn't have been a war in the first place.

With the Zuma though, at least with regards to the forgery we got a OOC confirmation about the reason. What I don't recall seeing is if it was the only reason for the attack, or more the straw that broke the camels back.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 04:59:12 AM
Here's a possible example:

Since we know the Zuma only take actions in response to what human players do or say to them, one possibility for the events is thus:

Madina, knowing that it would be fighting a civil war (from either sides perspective) decides that it doesn't want Terran interference in their war so that their side has a better chance of winning. This decision is made because the side expects Terran would side against them. Thus, this Madinan faction decides to give the Zuma 2000 bushels of food to invade Terran for a bit to make them wary about leaving their borders. The Zuma comply because for some unknown reason they need a lot of food for worthless regions. They make up some random excuse for the invasion and thus Terran gets attacked.

(This is purely 100% made up, although I guess it could be true, but is merely to illustrate that what someone thinks is going on isn't always the truth.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 31, 2012, 05:17:35 AM
Here's a possible example:

Since we know the Zuma only take actions in response to what human players do or say to them, one possibility for the events is thus:

Madina, knowing that it would be fighting a civil war (from either sides perspective) decides that it doesn't want Terran interference in their war so that their side has a better chance of winning. This decision is made because the side expects Terran would side against them. Thus, this Madinan faction decides to give the Zuma 2000 bushels of food to invade Terran for a bit to make them wary about leaving their borders. The Zuma comply because for some unknown reason they need a lot of food for worthless regions. They make up some random excuse for the invasion and thus Terran gets attacked.

(This is purely 100% made up, although I guess it could be true, but is merely to illustrate that what someone thinks is going on isn't always the truth.)

See this? This is fantastic. Why can't the rest of you see that you can play a game with a GM-controlled faction?

I mean, it's like Everquest, where the gate guards are level 299, and the highest character is 50. Don't be stupid and try and attack them, just leave them alone, or use them to defend yourself.

If you have a legitimate suggestion for the Zuma GM, send him a PM, here on the forums. I've done it before, and he wrote back a decent response. He's a decent guy, trying his best to play the GM characters that Tom gave him to play, in the way that Tom told him to play them.

Ever notice that Tom never posts to this thread? It's probably because he has better things to do, but has anyone considered that the Zuma GM is Tom? Consider that--it's his game, he wants to play an OP GM realm, put up or shut up.

And no, I don't think it's really Tom. But the GM is playing Haktoo and Screamer and Fang Fang and all the rest according to his instructions.

So either learn to play with the Zuma, learn to play against the Zuma, learn to ignore the Zuma, die, or move your character. Pick one.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 05:34:26 AM
Don't be stupid and try and attack them, just leave them alone, or use them to defend yourself.

Except we did leave them alone and they attacked without warning.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 31, 2012, 05:36:57 AM
What would you do if Aurvandil did the same with their 25k army? Or all of SA realms insisted they no longer wished to honour the treaty and they had som 50k CS willing to settle the matter?

Well this right here is why I think the entire idea of NPC realms is really just bad right from the get go. On BT, where they are specifically designed as overwhelming but ultimately surmountable challenges that can be expected to destroy entire realms from time to time, and are advertised as such, they are fine. Trying to integrate one into a non-Invasion island as 'just another realm' (sort of) is not the same. I could have guessed that exactly this would happen. Any permanent NPC realm is going to eventually cause friction and resentment no matter what it does. When SA decides to screw you over it sucks but there's no excuse. SA is just a bunch of players like everyone else, subject to the same rules, and deep down we all know that if they beat you, they did it fair and square. When an NPC realm that operates under different and (actually making it worse) unknown rules screws you, it's a lot easier to feel like you've been unfairly attacked. Remember how people used to accuse Tom of giving his realms unfair advantages? It's exactly the same principle. No matter how fair the GM, no matter how even handed he is, someone somewhere is going to get upset over what he does and blame it on the 'unfair' advantages the NPC's get. IMO the resentment such a realm inevitably creates is not worth what it contributes, especially when BM players are more than capable of creating their own conflicts and plotlines without any outside help.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 05:37:38 AM
Except we did leave them alone and they attacked without warning.

As far as I can tell from the statements of multiple players, this is not true.

Someone messed with them, and the ruler of Terran has done so at least once. Just because not every single member of the realm did something, doesn't mean they weren't messing with the Zuma somehow. Granted, I only have what is in this forum and my char's own experience to discuss it, but that's what I can tell.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 05:39:47 AM
I am referring to the time they attacked us before this when they didn't bother to check if a letter they received was real or not.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 05:40:25 AM
When an NPC realm that operates under different and (actually making it worse) unknown rules screws you, it's a lot easier to feel like you've been unfairly attacked. Remember how people used to accuse Tom of giving his realms unfair advantages? It's exactly the same principle.

You're right its exactly the same principle:

No matter what anyone says, its absolutely untrue. Just because you complain the most doesn't make you right.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 05:45:21 AM
You're right its exactly the same principle:

No matter what anyone says, its absolutely untrue. Just because you complain the most doesn't make you right.

Well that is like accusing of cheating. This is complaining about GM's doing a bad job. It is pretty different. We can debate whether they are actually doing a bad job or not. Accusing of cheating there could be proof or just speculation.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 05:46:30 AM
Well this right here is why I think the entire idea of NPC realms is really just bad right from the get go. On BT, where they are specifically designed as overwhelming but ultimately surmountable challenges that can be expected to destroy entire realms from time to time, and are advertised as such, they are fine. Trying to integrate one into a non-Invasion island as 'just another realm' (sort of) is not the same. I could have guessed that exactly this would happen. Any permanent NPC realm is going to eventually cause friction and resentment no matter what it does. When SA decides to screw you over it sucks but there's no excuse. SA is just a bunch of players like everyone else, subject to the same rules, and deep down we all know that if they beat you, they did it fair and square. When an NPC realm that operates under different and (actually making it worse) unknown rules screws you, it's a lot easier to feel like you've been unfairly attacked. Remember how people used to accuse Tom of giving his realms unfair advantages? It's exactly the same principle. No matter how fair the GM, no matter how even handed he is, someone somewhere is going to get upset over what he does and blame it on the 'unfair' advantages the NPC's get. IMO the resentment such a realm inevitably creates is not worth what it contributes, especially when BM players are more than capable of creating their own conflicts and plotlines without any outside help.

Rubbish. You only have to look at the amount of claims that SA is a Dev favoured group to know that losing parties always have the option to cry and claim the other side cheats. In fact every war I've been involved in that has either seen a realm destroyed or almost destroyed has resulted in claims and bitterness the same as what is currently targeted at the Zuma GM. Hell sometime just winning a battle results in OOC message storm about how the realm is full of cheats, or how they exploited this bug, or my favourite, you big realm bullies ruin the game. When people see an army with near 100% movement, the first thing most people seem to think it multi cheats.

I saw no end of bitter OOC hatred towards the main group of SA when I was in D'Hara. Really really petty stuff. No SA realm had invaded, we had not been forced to accept SA as a religion, but there was some serious hatred going on there.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 31, 2012, 05:48:43 AM
Yes, because we play Battlemaster since it's so much like Everquest. We should all use the Zuma as our own personal shields and sic them on anyone who tries to attack us. Unfortunately, egamma, it is exactly that which is the problem with the Zuma. They are overpowered, so people will do whatever they want, and if their enemies try to retaliate, they find a way to send the Zuma after them. Which is exactly what people hate about them.

You're right its exactly the same principle:

No matter what anyone says, its absolutely untrue. Just because you complain the most doesn't make you right.

That is not what he is saying.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 05:50:21 AM
Yes, because we play Battlemaster since it's so much like Everquest. We should all use the Zuma as our own personal shields and sic them on anyone who tries to attack us. Unfortunately, egamma, it is exactly that which is the problem with the Zuma. They are overpowered, so people will do whatever they want, and if their enemies try to retaliate, they find a way to send the Zuma after them. Which is exactly what people hate about them.

That is not what he is saying.

Has ANYONE managed to use the Zuma in this way?  Apart from Terrance the few attempts I know about in this regard, ended very badly for the characters involved. I've always suspected there was some underlying problem between the Zuma and Terran that allowed Terrance to pull it off. Are we really basing all this hate on a single instance in how many years?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 05:57:28 AM
Has ANYONE managed to use the Zuma in this way?  Apart from Terrance the few attempts I know about in this regard, ended very badly for the characters involved. I've always suspected there was some underlying problem between the Zuma and Terran that allowed Terrance to pull it off. Are we really basing all this hate on a single instance in how many years?

There has been no underlying problem between Terran and the Zuma until maybe after the Terrance incident. And I am upset about that because it was worse then the current one and lost my army twice to it, both of which were unexpected attacks. This current attack is not as bad but still trigger happy in my opinion and again no warning. The first year I had been playing the Zuma did nothing and were boring but I was fine with that. Then from doing that they be retarded and attack Terran over dumb stuff. So yeah to me the two sorta three attacks on Terran have been so annoying they warrant that for me.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 31, 2012, 06:00:53 AM
Yes, because we play Battlemaster since it's so much like Everquest. We should all use the Zuma as our own personal shields and sic them on anyone who tries to attack us.

No, what I am saying is, don't pick a fight you can't win.

Besides the ONE incident with the forged letter, can someone name another time when the Zuma did something unprovoked?

Like De-Legro is saying, complaints very similar to these can be found in this same forum, under the SA threads.

For some reason, people think that they are playing Whinemaster, not Battlemaster. I'm not sure why, though--the URL clearly says Battle.

What I fail to understand is why Terran hasn't tried talking to those of us in D'Hara about the Zuma. One, some of us have positive experiences with them, two, we're in an alliance, and three, we have food stocks to last us over 80 days--which means we can take our substantial gold income and divert it entirely into a war effort for at least 2 months. Our income is roughly equal to that of Terran.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 31, 2012, 06:04:18 AM
Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but all of my knowledge and experience of them suggests that if you just look at the map of Dwilight and pretend that every region that the Zuma hold and every region they touch simply didn't exist and played accordingly, then you would pretty much not have to deal with the Zuma. If members of your realm (especially your rulers) choose to not do so, or someone chooses to interact with them, that is a different story. Either punish those characters or take the consequences, or simply move elsewhere. The Zuma are bounded by certain game mechanics which limit their power, and as far as I can tell they also only respond to human interactions instead of simply killing for no reason.

As you yourself just pointed out, you might still pay the price for what some other player or realm does. Non-interaction does not protect you in any way, and you may not be able to effectively punish the character who brings it down on your head. And frankly, the move elsewhere sentiment isn't very constructive. That line of thinking follows from an assumption that the GM has a greater right to be there than the players. While that's certainly a valid position (Tom's game, Tom's rules), it's not really a good one if your greatest concern is the player experience, and suddenly realizing that the characters and realms you've devoted time and effort to are doomed to have to constantly subordinate what they want to the dictates of dealing with an NPC realm is not bound to be a good experience in anyone's book I would think.

On another note: I'm fairly sure that if Terran for instance wanted to involve itself in the Luria affair and simply ignore the Zuma during that time and proceed not to taunt or insult them, they would be perfectly capable of doing so without the Zuma interference.

That depends entirely on whether someone or something else sets the Zuma off while their attention and possibly their army is elsewhere. Considering how suddenly and often the Zuma have gone berserk lately, and how trivial some of the reasons for those episodes have been, if I were Terran I would not be at all confident that I could afford to do anything other than watch that border like a hawk and focus all my attention on not only *not* provoking the Zuma, but on making sure that no one else does either.

Heck at this point I would have to start thinking about a policy of constant surveillance of Zuma lands to see who goes in and out, so I know who to blame and which realms to punish when the Zuma next come down on me. And then I would maybe start organizing all the realms that border the Zuma to commit them all to a policy of doing everything possible to prevent *any* character from entering Zuma lands without first obtaining permission from the Moot. I'd seal my borders to non-Moot nobility under threat of war, unless permission is obtained in advance. I'd make it a bannable offense in my realm to enter Zuma lands without permission.

But then, why should I have to do all that? Why should I have to focus so much energy and attention on this when it's not really what I want to be doing? I'm playing Battlemaster, not Zumamaster. And yet as far as I can tell, the *only * way I can be even somewhat certain that the Zuma aren't going to go ballistic on me at unpredictable moments is to prevent *anyone* from talking to them, not just my nobles. And thus the Zuma become more and more of a plot sink. The more I try to avoid dealing with them, the more time and effort I have to devote to that task, which defeats the point, the point being that I'm just not interested in them and would like to be able to pursue my own goals without having to give them any thought at all.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:06:25 AM
Besides the ONE incident with the forged letter, can someone name another time when the Zuma did something unprovoked?

Well it is good to know I am getting somewhere with these complaints, that people recognize the forged letter attack was a mistake.

The new attack on Terran was I guess provoked, but what ever it was exactly I am betting it is a huge overreaction. Plus it was without warning. And the things that would have caused the provoking were because we all got upset at the Zuma over the forged letter incident.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 31, 2012, 06:11:18 AM
Well it is good to know I am getting somewhere with these complaints, that people recognize the forged letter attack was a mistake.


I never said mistake. As Garret pointed out IC a few weeks back, it was an "unfortunate incident."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 06:11:50 AM
That line of thinking follows from an assumption that the GM has a greater right to be there than the players. While that's certainly a valid position (Tom's game, Tom's rules), it's not really a good one if your greatest concern is the player experience, and suddenly realizing that the characters and realms you've devoted time and effort to are doomed to have to constantly subordinate what they want to the dictates of dealing with an NPC realm is not bound to be a good experience in anyone's book I would think.

That essentially is my position. The reasoning is quite simple:

The Zuma were there first and known by everyone that they were there since way before Terran was founded.

I'm not saying: "Move elsewhere if you don't want to deal with the Zuma"

I am saying: "If you don't want to deal with the Zuma, don't move right next to them."

If player actions didn't take into account the chance that this unknown NPC realm sitting right next to my realm may at some point in the future not think too nicely about my expansion then that is not the GM's fault.

Dwilight is huge, right next to the Zuma isn't the only place to play your own realm on Dwilight. Dwilight also isn't the only island of Battlemaster, so there are other options. If you want to found a realm why not colonize Darfix? Its an open city right? Oh wait, there is a large power bloc right next door which may not like it? Does it really make a difference that this power bloc is SA instead of the Zuma? The same player choices are involved.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:12:14 AM
I never said mistake. As Garret pointed out IC a few weeks back, it was an "unfortunate incident."

Pretty much the same thing.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:16:36 AM
That essentially is my position. The reasoning is quite simple:

The Zuma were there first and known by everyone that they were there since way before Terran was founded.

I'm not saying: "Move elsewhere if you don't want to deal with the Zuma"

I am saying: "If you don't want to deal with the Zuma, don't move right next to them."

If player actions didn't take into account the chance that this unknown NPC realm sitting right next to my realm may at some point in the future not think too nicely about my expansion then that is not the GM's fault.

Dwilight is huge, right next to the Zuma isn't the only place to play your own realm on Dwilight. Dwilight also isn't the only island of Battlemaster, so there are other options. If you want to found a realm why not colonize Darfix? Its an open city right? Oh wait, there is a large power bloc right next door which may not like it? Does it really make a difference that this power bloc is SA instead of the Zuma? The same player choices are involved.

Except the Zuma haven't been caring about Terran expansion and we made sure they were fine with it before we did. We learned the hard way about that when we marched to fight monsters due to TMP along their border and they attacked us. And when I started playing in Terran I was curious about the Zuma and I found out they did like nothing. So my year long impression about them was they just sit there and buy food, and you shouldn't go into their lands. That was fine so no need to move. Then there is this sudden and awful change in how they act.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 31, 2012, 06:18:29 AM
Rubbish. You only have to look at the amount of claims that SA is a Dev favoured group to know that losing parties always have the option to cry and claim the other side cheats. In fact every war I've been involved in that has either seen a realm destroyed or almost destroyed has resulted in claims and bitterness the same as what is currently targeted at the Zuma GM. Hell sometime just winning a battle results in OOC message storm about how the realm is full of cheats, or how they exploited this bug, or my favourite, you big realm bullies ruin the game. When people see an army with near 100% movement, the first thing most people seem to think it multi cheats.

I saw no end of bitter OOC hatred towards the main group of SA when I was in D'Hara. Really really petty stuff. No SA realm had invaded, we had not been forced to accept SA as a religion, but there was some serious hatred going on there.

Oh yes, rubbish. Except that in one case there's absolutely no justification for such complaints. And in the other, the target of said complaints actually IS 'Dev favored' in the sense that an NPC realm has all kinds of serious advantages over any player realm, advantages similar to what a player realm would only be able to obtain by cheating. Can you see the difference?

Considering how doggedly you insist on dismissing out of hand the arguments of anyone who doesn't agree with you, my guess is no, not really.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 31, 2012, 06:23:19 AM
Basically, let me explain the Zuma. I may or may not know what I'm talking about, but I'll lay it out anyway.

Dwilight is the New World--North America/South America for those of you who hate history.
The Zuma are the Native Americans--'indians', Aztec, Inca, etc. Except that they aren't susceptible to smallpox.

Ever heard an indian speak in a 60's cartoon or western? "Me no want wampum. Me want horse."
What do the Zuma sound like? "Me no want treaty. Me want plus 5 frying pan of doom."

...anyway, that's all I have. Treat the Zuma like Apache--respect their strength or you'll find your village burned to the ground. Do you think that General Custer complained, "These Indians were here before us and they are so overpowered, so I'm going to attack their camp right here at the Little Bighorn"?

Yeah...think about that.

And...time for bed, I'm not making much sense, and probably getting close to offending someone. And I'm probably starting to sound like Garrett...scary.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 31, 2012, 06:27:13 AM
And...time for bed, I'm not making much sense, and probably getting close to offending someone. And I'm probably starting to sound like Garrett...scary.

You know, now that you point it out, that last post actually was a pretty good Artemesia impression  ;)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:28:30 AM
Basically, let me explain the Zuma. I may or may not know what I'm talking about, but I'll lay it out anyway.

Dwilight is the New World--North America/South America for those of you who hate history.
The Zuma are the Native Americans--'indians', Aztec, Inca, etc. Except that they aren't susceptible to smallpox.

Ever heard an indian speak in a 60's cartoon or western? "Me no want wampum. Me want horse."
What do the Zuma sound like? "Me no want treaty. Me want plus 5 frying pan of doom."

...anyway, that's all I have. Treat the Zuma like Apache--respect their strength or you'll find your village burned to the ground. Do you think that General Custer complained, "These Indians were here before us and they are so overpowered, so I'm going to attack their camp right here at the Little Bighorn"?

Yeah...think about that.

And...time for bed, I'm not making much sense, and probably getting close to offending someone. And I'm probably starting to sound like Garrett...scary.

Yeah that is generally good except this recent stuff is like a huge break in character for the Zuma from all the past stuff they have been doing. Also, the colonists legit pissed off the Native Americans where as Terran really didn't.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 31, 2012, 06:32:35 AM
Basically, let me explain the Zuma. I may or may not know what I'm talking about, but I'll lay it out anyway.

Dwilight is the New World--North America/South America for those of you who hate history.
The Zuma are the Native Americans--'indians', Aztec, Inca, etc. Except that they aren't susceptible to smallpox.

Ever heard an indian speak in a 60's cartoon or western? "Me no want wampum. Me want horse."
What do the Zuma sound like? "Me no want treaty. Me want plus 5 frying pan of doom."

...anyway, that's all I have. Treat the Zuma like Apache--respect their strength or you'll find your village burned to the ground. Do you think that General Custer complained, "These Indians were here before us and they are so overpowered, so I'm going to attack their camp right here at the Little Bighorn"?

Yeah...think about that.

And...time for bed, I'm not making much sense, and probably getting close to offending someone. And I'm probably starting to sound like Garrett...scary.

yeah we knew that about the Zuma already, except native Americans lived by the same rules as the europeans except they were several thousand years behind.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 31, 2012, 06:33:53 AM
Not to mention that the native americans weren't something that was around Europe, which is what we're supposed to be drawing on in an SMA atmosphere...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 06:34:33 AM
Oh yes, rubbish. Except that in one case there's absolutely no justification for such complaints. And in the other, the target of said complaints actually IS 'Dev favored' in the sense that an NPC realm has all kinds of serious advantages over any player realm, advantages similar to what a player realm would only be able to obtain by cheating. Can you see the difference?

Considering how doggedly you insist on dismissing out of hand the arguments of anyone who doesn't agree with you, my guess is no, not really.

What serious advantages? You guys can't claim not to know what the rules governing the Zuma are and then claim the mechanics give them serious advantages. They have large armies, sure. Everyone seems to think they can be summoned at will. They can't. Nor are they free to maintain, they have their costs and the Zuma GM needs to work constantly to meet them. The Zuma are controlled by a single player. But that is both a weakness and an advantage. When the one GM can't log in, the armies do nothing.

But at the end of the day, the most telling thing for me is that for all the power of the Zuma, for all that they "over react" to insults, the GM is obviously NOT attacking as much as he could or doing damage on the scale he could. If he was Terran would have lost many regions. People talk about 35-100k of armies, if he truly wished to that sort of force would drive the capital rogue in no time.

So the conclusion, he is doing his best to make the Zuma be some sort of threat, a force people don't want to mess with, without actually going to the length of destroying realms.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:41:51 AM
What serious advantages? You guys can't claim not to know what the rules governing the Zuma are and then claim the mechanics give them serious advantages. They have large armies, sure. Everyone seems to think they can be summoned at will. They can't. Nor are they free to maintain, they have their costs and the Zuma GM needs to work constantly to meet them. The Zuma are controlled by a single player. But that is both a weakness and an advantage. When the one GM can't log in, the armies do nothing.

But at the end of the day, the most telling thing for me is that for all the power of the Zuma, for all that they "over react" to insults, the GM is obviously NOT attacking as much as he could or doing damage on the scale he could. If he was Terran would have lost many regions. People talk about 35-100k of armies, if he truly wished to that sort of force would drive the capital rogue in no time.

So the conclusion, he is doing his best to make the Zuma be some sort of threat, a force people don't want to mess with, without actually going to the length of destroying realms.

That doesn't really matter much because at lease I am upset over why the attacks happened at all, not the scale in which they were done.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 06:43:40 AM
Scale really does matter though.

If a single forged letter had the Zuma straight up destroy Terran without waiting, then yes I'd be pissed too.

However, if the Zuma only destroy you if you try and destroy them, and do lesser punishments for lesser things, than that is balanced imo.

You lost a region? So what, monsters and undead do that all the time to the rest of Dwilight (or used to). You're safer from monsters and undead because of the Zuma, so that is an advantage for Terran.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 06:47:22 AM
That doesn't really matter much because at lease I am upset over why the attacks happened at all, not the scale in which they were done.

The attacks weren't really due to the forgery. That was the catalyst for the situation. The attacks resulted from the way Terran handled the situation. Now to someone like Dante who has experiance with what is and isn't acceptable when addressing the Zuma the mistakes are probably painfully obvious. Either for all their time living next to the Zuma the relevant Terran nobles did not have this experiance, or for RP reasons didn't follow it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:48:10 AM
Scale really does matter though.

If a single forged letter had the Zuma straight up destroy Terran without waiting, then yes I'd be pissed too.

However, if the Zuma only destroy you if you try and destroy them, and do lesser punishments for lesser things, than that is balanced imo.

You lost a region? So what, monsters and undead do that all the time to the rest of Dwilight (or used to). You're safer from monsters and undead because of the Zuma, so that is an advantage for Terran.

Your right. I guess a better way to put it is I am upset enough to complain over those attacks with the reasoning for them, that the scale doesn't matter.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:51:41 AM
The attacks weren't really due to the forgery. That was the catalyst for the situation. The attacks resulted from the way Terran handled the situation. Now to someone like Dante who has experiance with what is and isn't acceptable when addressing the Zuma the mistakes are probably painfully obvious. Either for all their time living next to the Zuma the relevant Terran nobles did not have this experiance, or for RP reasons didn't follow it.

Well there was a first attack that happened, that no one in Terran knew why it happened. We then had to discover the whole forged letter thing. But I disagree that Terran handled that poorly that caused a warrant for a second attack. There was absurdity with the whole verification thing.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 31, 2012, 06:56:26 AM
That essentially is my position. The reasoning is quite simple:

The Zuma were there first and known by everyone that they were there since way before Terran was founded.

I'm not saying: "Move elsewhere if you don't want to deal with the Zuma"

I am saying: "If you don't want to deal with the Zuma, don't move right next to them."

If player actions didn't take into account the chance that this unknown NPC realm sitting right next to my realm may at some point in the future not think too nicely about my expansion then that is not the GM's fault.

Dwilight is huge, right next to the Zuma isn't the only place to play your own realm on Dwilight. Dwilight also isn't the only island of Battlemaster, so there are other options. If you want to found a realm why not colonize Darfix? Its an open city right? Oh wait, there is a large power bloc right next door which may not like it? Does it really make a difference that this power bloc is SA instead of the Zuma? The same player choices are involved.

You have a point, though if you look at the complaints in this thread I think a lot of people are frustrated because what the Zuma have been doing recently is so different than the way they've behaved for years. I know that there are reasons. I know it's not really fair to accuse the GM of inconsistency. That doesn't change the fact that this change of behavior is both sudden and unprecedented in its intensity, and I think it's taken many players by surprise.

The Zuma were always powerful, but when they were relatively restrained about using that power it created the illusion that the realms nearby would still be able to chart their own courses. That illusion has just been shattered, and clearly a lot of players are disappointed by the reality that they can suddenly perceive.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on January 31, 2012, 07:10:18 AM
What serious advantages? You guys can't claim not to know what the rules governing the Zuma are and then claim the mechanics give them serious advantages. They have large armies, sure. Everyone seems to think they can be summoned at will. They can't. Nor are they free to maintain, they have their costs and the Zuma GM needs to work constantly to meet them. The Zuma are controlled by a single player. But that is both a weakness and an advantage. When the one GM can't log in, the armies do nothing.

Are you contending that the Zuma have no serious advantages over a player realm?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 07:18:11 AM
Are you contending that the Zuma have no serious advantages over a player realm?

I'm saying that for the majority of the players here, any such claims would be speculation at the best, since they claim such ignorance of the way the realm works.In my opinion, they do have some big advantages, they also have some massive disadvantages. Its is my feeling they balance out in general, but for specific situations they will have different levels of influence.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on January 31, 2012, 07:39:27 AM
You have a point, though if you look at the complaints in this thread I think a lot of people are frustrated because what the Zuma have been doing recently is so different than the way they've behaved for years. I know that there are reasons. I know it's not really fair to accuse the GM of inconsistency. That doesn't change the fact that this change of behavior is both sudden and unprecedented in its intensity, and I think it's taken many players by surprise.

The Zuma were always powerful, but when they were relatively restrained about using that power it created the illusion that the realms nearby would still be able to chart their own courses. That illusion has just been shattered, and clearly a lot of players are disappointed by the reality that they can suddenly perceive.

I understand where you are coming from and your point. A lot of people are surprised and taken aback, I would just say that it isn't right to point fingers of blame at the GM or their situation for not considering that things could change with the Zuma. Unless my own character's interactions are completely different than what others deal with, there are certainly reasons for the changes that have taken place. They may not be immediately apparent and I don't intend on giving them away because a lot went into figuring out what I have but it is just important to consider that the Zuma were in fact in place before the human realms they are now dealing with. Perhaps if things went back to how they were before the Zuma started taking a more active role, the Zuma would also begin taking a less active role again?

One may also want to consider, that the Zuma actions were intended only as a single time consequence for things. However, that the responses that the human realms gave to those actions are compounding their own problems. I know it is frustrating to deal with the Zuma and have to try and figure them out, but it isn't that hard if your goals are simple which Terran's seem to be.

The goals I speak of are: have the Zuma leave us alone. That is pretty simple to achieve in comparison to some of the more complex goals I and others have pursued with the Zuma at times and it could be achieved likely through simple trial and error. "Well if we attack them, they get mad and fight. If we yell at them and insult them, they get mad at us and fight. If one of our nobles does something to piss them off, and we don't straight up punish the noble(with like bans), well that's like any normal human response. The assumption is the whole realm supports it."

Personally, with only looking at what is in this very long forum topic, I feel the Zuma have almost given too many hints as to how to have them either do what you want or at the very least leave you alone.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on January 31, 2012, 07:45:34 AM
Like it or not im staying on dwilight and playing this game!  8)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 08:05:18 AM
I understand where you are coming from and your point. A lot of people are surprised and taken aback, I would just say that it isn't right to point fingers of blame at the GM or their situation for not considering that things could change with the Zuma. Unless my own character's interactions are completely different than what others deal with, there are certainly reasons for the changes that have taken place. They may not be immediately apparent and I don't intend on giving them away because a lot went into figuring out what I have but it is just important to consider that the Zuma were in fact in place before the human realms they are now dealing with. Perhaps if things went back to how they were before the Zuma started taking a more active role, the Zuma would also begin taking a less active role again?

One may also want to consider, that the Zuma actions were intended only as a single time consequence for things. However, that the responses that the human realms gave to those actions are compounding their own problems. I know it is frustrating to deal with the Zuma and have to try and figure them out, but it isn't that hard if your goals are simple which Terran's seem to be.

The goals I speak of are: have the Zuma leave us alone. That is pretty simple to achieve in comparison to some of the more complex goals I and others have pursued with the Zuma at times and it could be achieved likely through simple trial and error. "Well if we attack them, they get mad and fight. If we yell at them and insult them, they get mad at us and fight. If one of our nobles does something to piss them off, and we don't straight up punish the noble(with like bans), well that's like any normal human response. The assumption is the whole realm supports it."

Personally, with only looking at what is in this very long forum topic, I feel the Zuma have almost given too many hints as to how to have them either do what you want or at the very least leave you alone.

Except the forgery incident goes against that. They didn't confirm if was legit and attacked without warning. Then we got justifiable pissed about that which because the Zuma are still ridiculous decided to attack us over.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 10:36:16 AM
Except the forgery incident goes against that. They didn't confirm if was legit and attacked without warning. Then we got justifiable pissed about that which because the Zuma are still ridiculous decided to attack us over.

They had no reason to expect it wasn't legit to start with. If I receive information that a realm is plotting to destroy my own, I don't ask them if it is true. Firstly they will deny it, secondly it will warn them. If I have a channel through which to verify it without arising suspicion then I would attempt that. For all we know the Zuma did that, for all we know the channel they THOUGHT was reliable were the same group that put Terrance up to the scheme in the first place, assuming that Terrance didn't start the whole thing on his own. If they weren't in on it, perhaps they saw a way to profit from it so they confirmed it anyway.

If I don't have a means to verify it, well then I need to take some sort of action. Depending on the situation, I would probably either work to ensure my defense if I believed I was at a disadvantage. Or work on a way of being able to strike them first if I perceived an advantage.

When Terran raised questions about it authenticity, the Zuma pulled back. Ultimatums where given. Things continued to go south. From the messages I saw passed around the island, by this stage had I been in the Zuma's shoes, I would have suspected that Terran was guilty and was playing for time.

But then the Zuma GM has a very difficult job, the Zuma were set up to be non-human. Specifically they don't think like humans. That often means they process information differently and have much different standards. Who really knows what the fictional Zuma thing about things like Forgery, I understand that it is not a concept that exists within their own culture.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 31, 2012, 10:54:27 AM
You cannot say "For all we know" and state something as if it were an irrefutable argument. "For all we know" doesn't hold up, because that is a cop-out argument.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 11:43:58 AM
You cannot say "For all we know" and state something as if it were an irrefutable argument. "For all we know" doesn't hold up, because that is a cop-out argument.

I'm not. What I am pointing out, is just like in many cases when dealing with other player realms, WE DON'T KNOW ALL THE FACTS. Yet we are willing to tar and feather the GM, make assumptions about why he did things, what info he was acting on etc. In other words I'm saying the assumption that he didn't verify it is not based on any observable fact other then he didn't approach Terran or presumably the Moot. I am offering an alternative to the assumption that he just took it as absolute fact, based on a possible speculative path given the facts as presented.

"For all we know" is not a cope out, it is what it is, a introduction to a hypothesis. Now if you want to refute the hypothesis as invalid given the data, please feel free.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 12:43:16 PM
1. Yes, Terran was naturally and justifiably angry that the Zuma attacked them due to a forged letter. But now, think: Does it actually matter whether you are ICly justified? OOCly, I'm sure we all understand your player frustrations. But we still have to deal with the game. Using OOC information to make people happier is just as wrong as using it to make people angrier or exploiting. That said, the IC stuff given that I've seen from Terran isn't doing them any favors. In fact, the new Terran guy who walked into Overroot a few days ago did an even better job than the ruler handling that situation, giving a prompt apology and explanation.

2. History of the Zuma and Terran. I am not a GM, not part of the dev team, but I still can't talk about any deeper things about the Zuma except that which is readily observable (Which does sometimes contribute to the reason why I say things that seem obvious...Because, well, I'm really only supposed to talk about the obvious) Anyway, there has been a long history, and Terran keeps claiming that they earned Vates' respect. Has anyone wondered about that though? Like, who knows...Maybe someone else might want to elaborate on this point. It's important too, because it really does mean something. Terran might not want to admit it, and no doubt so many people have forgotten (It's been like 3 years now), but there is no doubt in my mind that what is happening in Terran isn't something so sudden. I also believe that if you look back and seriously checked the messages on all of Dwilight, you'd see the trend. But that's impossible, so I suppose it's possible to figure it out by retracing the stuff the daimons and Garret have said regarding the state of Terran, mainly to sometime in the summer of last year. Even more recently, Garret even mentioned something that should have been a hint to Terran. The response was a correction to how Terran was formed by earning Vates' respect or something.

3. Some people are quite right. There is probably something going on between the Zuma and Terran which made it so much quicker for the Zuma to attack them. Remember Barca and teh daimons recently? I don't know how unrelated is the fact that shortly after their formation they appointed Bowie as their duke. Those daimons have long memories you know, even if they choose not to always act on them. So I'm just saying, usually you're not screwed for a one-time mistake. Usually, it wouldn't be the first time you messed with the daimons if they actually go in your regions and mess with your lands.

4. For anyone who doesn't believe #3, well, you will notice that of all the realms that have been attacked, each has had a history with the daimons in some way. D'Hara: Chenier definitely had something going with Vates, and remember, not everything is as it seems. Also, some knight called Asriel Octavius started crowing about how daimons were cowards in response to a sudden attack (Which came because they were showing their strength or something, possibly much in the same line as they had "tested" Terran. Only D'Hara this time.) But even then the daimons just messed with a D'haran city and called it even more or less. Terran: Too much, not enough time to list them all and explain what might be the significance and contribution to possibly a predisposition to daimonic attack.

Madina: Remember that Balewind character way back when? Madina might.
Ordenstaat: Well that was just unfortunate on their part that they got Flame as the one selected to clean their region of monsters and undead. Not an actual attack. Just a being of fire walking through a city.
Barca: First time, you'd think they would be smarter about choosing the duke of their capital. You'd think they would know that Bowie Ironsides was blacklisted by the Zuma, since it was pretty publicly stated shortly after Bowie made his whole insulting daimons talk. He even spent a few weeks in Terran before going to Barca I believe, in which he further insulted the daimons. (And let's add that part to Terran's list too) Second time, once again Barca chose not to be safe and ask about Eregon. They're not even the first to try settling along the border of the Zuma. Terran did, and they're still around. Asylon did, and they, in fact, were NEVER attacked by the daimons. Even with the Kosht switch, and the initially poor handling by the king, the daimons still did not attack Asylon.

5. Learn from Asylon. Their king Glaumring said a bunch of stuff the daimons probably disapproved of, and yet they still have never been attacked by the daimons. They got help from the daimons to clear their lands of monsters and undead in the past, and most of their leaders can have relatively cordial relations with the Zuma. Kosht is an aberration, which only became a problem due to the way the king handled it. From what I have seen, it looks like Asylon has managed to recover and not drop the metaphoric ball. No more details from me about this. You can ask someone from Asylon about it. Glaumring, for example. Because, for all the weird stuff that has happened to Asylon, unlike Terran and Barca, the other two bordering realms, they have never faced the overt hostility of the daimons. Maybe got scolded a little, but that's all.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2012, 03:25:11 PM
The attacks weren't really due to the forgery. That was the catalyst for the situation. The attacks resulted from the way Terran handled the situation. Now to someone like Dante who has experiance with what is and isn't acceptable when addressing the Zuma the mistakes are probably painfully obvious. Either for all their time living next to the Zuma the relevant Terran nobles did not have this experiance, or for RP reasons didn't follow it.

Except you don't know how we handled the situation with regard to the Zuma.

Unless, maybe, you're OOC communicating with the Zuma GM about the matter. In which case you have a remarkably unfair advantage over all the rest of us.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2012, 03:30:44 PM
That depends entirely on whether someone or something else sets the Zuma off while their attention and possibly their army is elsewhere. Considering how suddenly and often the Zuma have gone berserk lately, and how trivial some of the reasons for those episodes have been, if I were Terran I would not be at all confident that I could afford to do anything other than watch that border like a hawk and focus all my attention on not only *not* provoking the Zuma, but on making sure that no one else does either.

Heck at this point I would have to start thinking about a policy of constant surveillance of Zuma lands to see who goes in and out, so I know who to blame and which realms to punish when the Zuma next come down on me. And then I would maybe start organizing all the realms that border the Zuma to commit them all to a policy of doing everything possible to prevent *any* character from entering Zuma lands without first obtaining permission from the Moot. I'd seal my borders to non-Moot nobility under threat of war, unless permission is obtained in advance. I'd make it a bannable offense in my realm to enter Zuma lands without permission.

But then, why should I have to do all that? Why should I have to focus so much energy and attention on this when it's not really what I want to be doing? I'm playing Battlemaster, not Zumamaster. And yet as far as I can tell, the *only * way I can be even somewhat certain that the Zuma aren't going to go ballistic on me at unpredictable moments is to prevent *anyone* from talking to them, not just my nobles. And thus the Zuma become more and more of a plot sink. The more I try to avoid dealing with them, the more time and effort I have to devote to that task, which defeats the point, the point being that I'm just not interested in them and would like to be able to pursue my own goals without having to give them any thought at all.

Thank you for describing Terran's strategy. We are actively pursuing almost exactly that strategy. It isn't fun, but, as far as we can tell, it's the only way to not die.

In response to what many have said... I'll be honest: I don't believe for a second that Terran is safe to leave its borders. The Zuma routinely keep 10's of thousands of CS sitting on the border. If your human neighbor did that, you'd be paranoid too. This idea that people are tossing around, that the Zuma can simply be ignored is total crap. We were ignoring the Zuma when they attacked Barca and Terran.

The forged message was a creative re-write of an exhortation by one of Terran's council members to ignore and not talk about the Zuma.

The policy of "pretend they're not there" has been attempted. Unfortunately, it did not work, ultimately. So now the policy has changed. We cannot afford to ignore the Zuma if they are not going to be passive.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 31, 2012, 03:43:32 PM
In response to what many have said... I'll be honest: I don't believe for a second that Terran is safe to leave its borders. The Zuma routinely keep 10's of thousands of CS sitting on the border.
But if they really are the unpredictable, unstoppable, violent hordes that some are claiming them to be, then if they did randomly attack you and try to wipe you out, there's nothing you could do about it anyway. So turtling in your realm seems pretty useless, doesn't it? We all know how 10's of thousands of CS of daimons really can't even be scratched by the army that Terran can field. (And probably not by any single realm on Dwilight, either.) The military defense against the Zuma is obviously pointless. So why not do something fun/useful with your army, and let the diplomats/ambassadors "defend" the realm against the Zuma?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 03:46:23 PM
The policy of "pretend they're not there" has been attempted. Unfortunately, it did not work, ultimately. So now the policy has changed. We cannot afford to ignore the Zuma if they are not going to be passive.

Yeah the problem is people keep saying to just not provoke them, and you will be fine. But for players in Terrran this feels false.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 03:53:02 PM
For players in Asylon (And even Glaumring can attest to this) there is really little fear of actual daimon assault. Sure, there can be the whole "They didn't value our treaty!" thing, but end all: Asylon has never suffered destruction by the daimons. Kosht rebelled, and the Zuma just didn't decide to return the region at that time due to what was said to them.

So please, do remember that Terran's not the only realm next to the Zuma. Barca might have gotten hit hard recently, but hey, they resolved it, and as far as I can tell, they'll be pretty well off going forward. Asylon has always had good relations, minus the small hitch regarding Kosht, and have never had hostile daimons in their lands.

Now here's the deal people of Terran and any other realms who find dealing with the Zuma boring and/or...whatever. Talk to the guys playing in Asylon to determine just how they are able not only to live next to the Zuma, but actually pay attention to their borders with Kabrinskia as well, sending their armies north to deal with monsters rather than keeping them in the south to watch against incoming daimons.

It can be done. It has been done. You can do it too, if you want. If you don't want to or your leaders are incapable of doing so, then perhaps ICly...it is time to consider how good your leaders really are, and whether you really want them to continue that course for your realm.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: dustole on January 31, 2012, 04:25:58 PM
If you want to hurt or slow down the Zuma then quit giving them food!  They didn't get obscenely powerful until every realm in the south west started giving/selling them all their surplus food. 

Allison brought Haktoo food when she went there to talk about Terrence and prevent conflict with SA.  200 bushels is not a lot of food and it seemed to make her way more pleased than it should have.  So if 200 bushels is important to the Daimons then what do you think they are doing with the 1000's and 1000's of bushels that everyone has been giving them?     

Also, have you considered that some of their raiding parties are there to steal food /and/ punish you?  Have you considered that some of their anger is over you stopping the continued food sales?    I noticed that the Zuma attacked Vassar.  That region must have been the region Terran was using to supply the Daimons with food.  Vassar /always/ had an open sell offer for food.  I bought a great number of bushels of food from Vassar sneaky style with the new(old) caravan system.  The region never seemed to run out of food.  Were the Daimons mad that their food wasn't being delivered? 


There are a lot of variables to this situation that aren't being considered.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Valast on January 31, 2012, 05:19:04 PM
The entire discussion here is amazing to me... and LONG... Just caught up!  :o

After careful review of everything written here, my summery is... PTHHHHHHH

We are all characters in a story here.  We take the actions we wish to take, yet we are subject to the world around us.  Play your part...live or die...thrive or fail...fight or fly... Take your lumps and carry on.

I love the GM interaction.  I think every island should have some sort of GM NPC...  It can help eliminate stagnation.  Sure, your realm/character/friends/plots/plans may come to an end because one noble fakes one letter...  Or perhaps that one letter (and the response from it) is what it takes to stand up as the Human race and prove that the Daimons are not the strongest.

*shrug* its our story to play out.  Stay in character and do your part.

All the OOC arguments only take away from the game.  I learned long ago to avoid OOC arguments because they nearly ruined this game for me.  I could not understand why I was being attacked when I did nothing wrong but play the game the way my character would.

I learned much about human nature through those flame wars against me... and the end result is I am still here playing...and the flamers are not.

Be civil... do not react... we are all here to play and have fun.

Now... go kill some Daimons.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: fodder on January 31, 2012, 06:04:13 PM
... how does selling food to daimons work now anyway?

it's noted that daimon rulers won't be grabbing all sell offers... but does that mean they'll stick up buy offers?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on January 31, 2012, 06:16:53 PM
It works by Garret.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 06:50:03 PM
Now here's the deal people of Terran and any other realms who find dealing with the Zuma boring and/or...whatever. Talk to the guys playing in Asylon to determine just how they are able not only to live next to the Zuma, but actually pay attention to their borders with Kabrinskia as well, sending their armies north to deal with monsters rather than keeping them in the south to watch against incoming daimons.

Say that to the forged letter incident. It was completely ridiculous and retarded.

And to the food thing in Vassar, I am the senator of that region and that isn't the case.

For the case of Terran vs. the Zuma simply get a statement from each player in Terran that have been there for at least a year about how the feel the Zuma have been affecting the game for them and why. If the majority of them are like the Zuma are making the game not fun, then the GM's should do something to fix or apologize for the ridiculous before and try not to do that again. If the GM's don't feel like doing that even though the majority of the players feel that way then I guess they don't care about the quality of game for the players, but at least we know not to bother complaining anymore. Lastly if the majority don't think that, then the few that are complaining should stop. Thus the endless debating will stop.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: fodder on January 31, 2012, 07:02:24 PM
It works by Garret.

what does that mean? garret will stick buy offers up?
garret will buy up whatever sell offers around he fancies?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 31, 2012, 07:08:16 PM
For the case of Terran vs. the Zuma simply get a statement from each player in Terran that have been there for at least a year about how the feel the Zuma have been affecting the game for them and why.
Why don't you ask them all to come here and state their opinion? If you can get each player of Terran to come here and state their case, then I think you will have a much stronger argument than "It was completely ridiculous and retarded."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on January 31, 2012, 07:19:08 PM
But if they really are the unpredictable, unstoppable, violent hordes that some are claiming them to be, then if they did randomly attack you and try to wipe you out, there's nothing you could do about it anyway. So turtling in your realm seems pretty useless, doesn't it? We all know how 10's of thousands of CS of daimons really can't even be scratched by the army that Terran can field. (And probably not by any single realm on Dwilight, either.) The military defense against the Zuma is obviously pointless. So why not do something fun/useful with your army, and let the diplomats/ambassadors "defend" the realm against the Zuma?

Because if we have walls, we might hold out long enough to RTO the entire Zuma Coalition?

(joking of course; I don't know if you even can RTO Zuma regions, and we don't have the priests or the conversion rates to do something like that)

But, in all seriousness... if it came to fighting, we might survive for a while.

And... the "pretend they're not there" strategy did not succeed in solving the Zuma Question. So we are taking a new approach. Terran is not idling around, doing nothing. We are taking proactive measures to try and make it so we can get back to Battlemaster rather than Zumamaster. But abstaining from Zumamaster is not an option. So now we're trying to play an effective medium-term game of Zumamaster to position us so we can get back to Battlemaster.

Indirik:
VanKaya, MaleMaldives, myself, Perth, and Scarlett have all spoken up unanimously that we find the Zuma, as they currently are, to be "Not fun." That's over 25% of Terran. There may have been others who posted briefly as well.

Maybe you should try and get 25% of Astrum to get on the forums and have a unified opinion about something.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on January 31, 2012, 07:40:44 PM
Hmmm...

What is the difference between the Cagilan Empire and the Zuma?

Or Sirion. Or Enweil (pre-fourth, most likely). Or any other powerful realm?

Powerful realms have their own goals and they will !@#$ you up if you stand in the way of them. This is not new or unique to the Zuma, so why is there a twenty seven page thread about why it is the epitome of evil for the Zuma to do so? Hell, the Zuma have had less impact than a realm of equivalent position (SA...) would have had because of how passive they are.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on January 31, 2012, 07:53:40 PM
(joking of course; I don't know if you even can RTO Zuma regions, and we don't have the priests or the conversion rates to do something like that)
That is an interesting question. I have no idea if that's possible or not.

Quote
And... the "pretend they're not there" strategy did not succeed in solving the Zuma Question. So we are taking a new approach. Terran is not idling around, doing nothing. We are taking proactive measures to try and make it so we can get back to Battlemaster rather than Zumamaster. But abstaining from Zumamaster is not an option. So now we're trying to play an effective medium-term game of Zumamaster to position us so we can get back to Battlemaster.
I'm not advocating an "ignore them" strategy. Rather, if you know that Method A is simply unworkable or impossible, then don't do it. Move on to Method B. And sicne military defense against the Zuma seems to be impossible (at least from an OOC sense, my character has reached no such conclusion IC, and would willingly engage them in battle, if needed) then don't try it. Simply, deal with the Zuma on a diplomatic/RP level instead, and let your army do whatever it was you would have been doing if you weren't mounted a doomed Zuma defense.

But, if you have a plan, that's cool.

Quote
VanKaya, MaleMaldives, myself, Perth, and Scarlett have all spoken up unanimously that we find the Zuma, as they currently are, to be "Not fun." That's over 25% of Terran. There may have been others who posted briefly as well.

Maybe you should try and get 25% of Astrum to get on the forums and have a unified opinion about something.
Oh, I know that it would be difficult to do. Yet MaleMaldivees is tossing around terms such as "the majority of the players", etc. If you are going to make such claims, then back them up. Ask them to come here and state their case. If they truly are as passionately against the Zuma as you are representing, then I think they should be willing to put forth the few minutes of effort it would take. It doesn't have to be a 5,000-word essay. A simple "My character's name is Frankie McTerran, and I think the Zuma hurt the Dwilight experience." from 75% of the Terran players would be excellent incentive for ZumaGM to re-evaluate the situation, and perhaps make some changes. (Bonus if you get a bunch of D'Harans and Barcans, too, and if they can contribute more than "I don't like the Zuma.) But if you have only 4 or 5 people here saying that, then I really doubt that you're going to make much more of an impact that you already have.

There have been some changes that have been made due to the feedback received in this thread, and possibly some more on the way, pending Tom's consultation/approval. Even if they happen, though, they may never be announced. But it would be in everyone's best interests to keep the discussion going, in as civil a manner as possible. Things like "it was retarded", "don't care about the quality of game", " they be retarded and attack Terran over dumb stuff", etc., are only going to make people less sympathetic to your side, and less willing to d anything about it. (Ad yes, I do know that you're not the one who said those things.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on January 31, 2012, 08:03:23 PM
Hmmm...

What is the difference between the Cagilan Empire and the Zuma?

Or Sirion. Or Enweil (pre-fourth, most likely). Or any other powerful realm?

Powerful realms have their own goals and they will !@#$ you up if you stand in the way of them. This is not new or unique to the Zuma, so why is there a twenty seven page thread about why it is the epitome of evil for the Zuma to do so? Hell, the Zuma have had less impact than a realm of equivalent position (SA...) would have had because of how passive they are.

That's my position as well. I've played against Lukon, CE, Belu invasion--and guess what, it's fun to play against a challenging enemy. I've stood my ground, alone, against the entire army of Archaron, back in 2008 when they seemed like multis.

C'mon, people. It's BATTLEmaster.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Valast on January 31, 2012, 08:27:33 PM
Again, I have just read all 27 pages of this TODAY...

But seems the entire argument is based on a few people who feel that GM's interacting with the players game is no fun... because it f's up your plans to kick the rear of some other player.

That is the basics of this entire 27 pages... I hear please remove the GM aspect so we can win... That is all I am hearing.  But you forget its not your game.  Go tell EA that you think they should make changes to a game...and you will be ignored.  That game you dropped $50 on... this one can be $0

Play the game the way it is designed... quit whining... quit flaming... You feel the GM's involved are screwing you over OOC or against the mechanics...email Tom or open Titan complaint.

Think that prdy much sums up this bitch fest.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vanKaya on January 31, 2012, 08:35:06 PM
That's my position as well. I've played against Lukon, CE, Belu invasion--and guess what, it's fun to play against a challenging enemy. I've stood my ground, alone, against the entire army of Archaron, back in 2008 when they seemed like multis.

C'mon, people. It's BATTLEmaster.

All those realms, regardless of how powerful they are, are still human realms, that can make human mistakes . The Zuma GM controls ALL the DAimons. Would you enjoy playing against Lukon or blahblahblah if you KNEW for a fact it was just one guy controlling it?

Why don't we add two more GMs, whats so hard about that???????

Why are the people on this thread arguing "CHANGE NOTHING, if they dont like it they can sit down and shut up!"

Seriously, no one, I repeat, NO ONE, who has been anti Zuma has been of the opinion to get rid of them entirely.

Also, contrary to what De-Legro insists, very few people are being critical of the Zuma GM, most if not all realize hes doing his best, however, the circumstances he must play in kinda lend themselves to a poor, uninteresting playstyle. Honestly if I was the GM I dont think I could do a much better job. On the other hand, if I was playing alongside two other GMs I think it would be exponentially more flavorful.

I actually quite enjoyed the Zuma before, they were mystical beings off in the corner who we had to be very careful not to disturb. Now they act like children and meet any perceived slight with massive armies. Someone brought up Everguard and the level 1000 guards. An interesting theory. I've never played everguard, but let me guess, if you attack the guard he beats you up, yes? what if you and your buddy are having a private conversation about the guard? does he come in and stomp you then too? What if someone gives the guard a forged message that says you called him a twat? does he come and kill you??

Honestly, the people defending the Zuma are employing logical fallacy over logical fallacy to prove their points. Many (most) of their arguments are circuitous and they often disprove their owne previous arguments with their newer arguments. If this was a verbal debate, you would all lose.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: MaleMaldives on January 31, 2012, 08:41:47 PM
Yeah i apologize for the retarded statement. It wasn't a good way to put things. But I will send an OOC message around Terran then probable stop posting here.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on January 31, 2012, 08:59:13 PM
Why don't we add two more GMs, whats so hard about that???????

Maintaining consistency of a story between multiple GMs is incredibly difficult, especially when the story has a span as long as the Zuma's. Just look at what happened with Vates: He created so many storylines for the Zuma but did so without collaboration from Haktoo left no usable notes behind for Haktoo to work with. Or you could look at the disaster that was Netherworld in the fourth invasion where some GMs out right refused to work with others.

And, finally, finding people who have the time, ability and willingness to take on the role of a GM is not easy. It is hard, thankless work where you will hear about everything you do wrong and very little about what you do right.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Sacha on January 31, 2012, 09:00:23 PM
What I wonder is this:

1. Pretty much from the start of Dwilight, it was known that there was a Daimon presence in the west.
2. Daimons were at the time known to be immensely powerful and very dangerous, and are not subject to any code of honor or even reasoning on a human level.
3. Daimons were known to raise huge armies that could trampled all but the greatest human armies thrown against them.
4. Western Dwilight was as far from civilization as could be at the opening of Dwilight.

Taking these facts into account, it's only logical that the closer you put yourself to Daimons and whatever minions/servants/allies they have, the closer you put yourself to danger in the form of irrational and enormously powerful beings who see humans as glorified vermin. So, by colonizing the west, you intentionally put yourself in the Daimons' crosshairs.

And somehow it's the GMs' fault that you got stomped on?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Telrunya on January 31, 2012, 09:16:12 PM
Quote
And, finally, finding people who have the time, ability and willingness to take on the role of a GM is not easy. It is hard, thankless work where you will hear about everything you do wrong and very little about what you do right.

And for that I want to thank the Zuma GM once more for his hard work :) I have always enjoyed the Zuma and hope you will continue your efforts for a long time! (That said, I'm sure the people that have complaints also recognize the time and dedication you spend on the Zuma!) Many thanks!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on January 31, 2012, 09:36:48 PM
Hmmm...

What is the difference between the Cagilan Empire and the Zuma?

Or Sirion. Or Enweil (pre-fourth, most likely). Or any other powerful realm?

The Zuma is a NPC realm. NPCs are held to a higher standard than normal players. If they don't want to be held to such a standard, then they should play like the rest of us do.

This is not to say the Zuma GM is not doing a good job; I think he has a thankless task and is doing quite well in the circumstances. But it is normal that the players voice their opinion about the game.

Disagreeing with the Zuma's behaviour is not like disagreeing with SA's behaviour. It's more like disagreeing with the way a certain game mechanics is set up. NPC's are not other players; they are part of the rules.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on January 31, 2012, 09:38:55 PM
Maintaining consistency of a story between multiple GMs is incredibly difficult, especially when the story has a span as long as the Zuma's. Just look at what happened with Vates: He created so many storylines for the Zuma but did so without collaboration from Haktoo left no usable notes behind for Haktoo to work with. Or you could look at the disaster that was Netherworld in the fourth invasion where some GMs out right refused to work with others.

Yet human realms composed of many players do manage to keep up a long term realm tradition.

(Yes, I know, I just contradicted my previous post by comparing the Zuma to a human realm. Sorry. I guess I'm not particularly logically consistent today.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Bjarnson on January 31, 2012, 11:23:29 PM
'lo there, I havent really been reading through the whole thread yet, but I just want to say that my experience with the Zuma has been most enjoyable. Sure it has been a tough issue for Asylon recently, as Duke of Echiur I might look south with dread and awe for the masses of creatures and beeings south of our border. But as the player behind my char, I am having a blast.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 11:32:11 PM
The Zuma is a NPC realm. NPCs are held to a higher standard than normal players. If they don't want to be held to such a standard, then they should play like the rest of us do.

This is not to say the Zuma GM is not doing a good job; I think he has a thankless task and is doing quite well in the circumstances. But it is normal that the players voice their opinion about the game.

Disagreeing with the Zuma's behaviour is not like disagreeing with SA's behaviour. It's more like disagreeing with the way a certain game mechanics is set up. NPC's are not other players; they are part of the rules.

Indeed they are. For example many normal players, had a thread similar to this occurred about their actions, would have just taken the supposed 100k armies they had, manufactured a reason, and destroyed every realm that spoke against them. We expect that the GM will not do this.

The GM plays to the standards Tom has set. If you think those standards need to be changed, then really you need to get a goodly number of players to support it, and send the argument directly to Tom. With a thread as full of flame as this one, I doubt he has the time to pick through it.

I totally get that the recent actions of the GM haven't met some players expectations. The converse is also true, they have met the expectations of other players. The GM can not possibly hope to meet the expectations of all players, thus he plays according the the guidelines set by Tom. Convince Tom and the guidelines will change.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 31, 2012, 11:39:20 PM
I'm honestly thinking about leaving the game. I didn't come to play D&Dmaster, I came to play Battlemaster, with other players, not an NPC faction. If I wanted to play with NPC factions, I would have made a character in Beluaterra. Currently the only thing keeping me in this game is my Dwilight character, and I'm starting to lose interest because we can't think of having war between our different realms with the Zuma being on such a hair trigger all the time.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on January 31, 2012, 11:49:14 PM
I'm honestly thinking about leaving the game. I didn't come to play D&Dmaster, I came to play Battlemaster, with other players, not an NPC faction. If I wanted to play with NPC factions, I would have made a character in Beluaterra. Currently the only thing keeping me in this game is my Dwilight character, and I'm starting to lose interest because we can't think of having war between our different realms with the Zuma being on such a hair trigger all the time.

You are in a realm that has excellent relations with the Zuma, with a ruler that from all account has a very good grasp on how to deal with them. I fail to see how the Zuma is affecting your realms ability to go to war at all. Unless your only possible targets are Terran and Barca and you have a rare sense of fair play.

Things will die down. Back when Terran was attacked years ago there were similar discussions, though we did not have a forum back then. Realms predicted that the west was doom, the Zuma had awakened, nothing was the same and PS why didn't Tom warn us. Then they went back into hibernation again.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on January 31, 2012, 11:51:20 PM
It's not my personal situation that is making me think about doing this, but the situation overall.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 01, 2012, 12:02:57 AM
It's not my personal situation that is making me think about doing this, but the situation overall.

So, to put it another way:

You're seriously considering leaving the game, not because anything has changed in how you can actually play, but just because you cannot stand the very concept of there being an NPC faction on Dwilight.

Is that substantially correct?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 01, 2012, 12:19:00 AM
You are in a realm that has excellent relations with the Zuma, with a ruler that from all account has a very good grasp on how to deal with them. I fail to see how the Zuma is affecting your realms ability to go to war at all. Unless your only possible targets are Terran and Barca and you have a rare sense of fair play.

Things will die down. Back when Terran was attacked years ago there were similar discussions, though we did not have a forum back then. Realms predicted that the west was doom, the Zuma had awakened, nothing was the same and PS why didn't Tom warn us. Then they went back into hibernation again.

You forgot Asylon!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: GoldPanda on February 01, 2012, 12:22:00 AM
Hmmm...

What is the difference between the Cagilan Empire and the Zuma?

Or Sirion. Or Enweil (pre-fourth, most likely). Or any other powerful realm?

Powerful realms have their own goals and they will !@#$ you up if you stand in the way of them. This is not new or unique to the Zuma, so why is there a twenty seven page thread about why it is the epitome of evil for the Zuma to do so? Hell, the Zuma have had less impact than a realm of equivalent position (SA...) would have had because of how passive they are.

The difference is, none of those realms you mentioned, as far as I'm aware, has Garret Artemesia for an ambassador. That's my only beef with the Zuma, really.

There is being a bully, and then there is cartoonish, supervillainy trolling.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Sacha on February 01, 2012, 12:23:43 AM
@Gustav, not to be mean or anything, but I really don't think you threatening to leave is going to make much of a difference.

I don't like the Daimons/Zuma at all myself, I feel they add little to the atmosphere other than a looming sense of doom for those nearby, but they're here and they won't be going away any time soon, so I deal with them as best I can. They are not a gigantic wrecking ball destroying realms at random. In fact they have yet to destroy a single realm, if I'm not mistaken. But they are very, very dangerous, and if you happen to have settled lands on their borders, well, then you have to deal with that whether you like it or not. There's plenty of realms who are not affected by them (or maybe a teensie bit) so it's not like they have the entire island by the balls.

@GoldPanda, not everyone talking to the Zuma does so via Garret, you know. There are people who speak to Haktoo directly.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 01, 2012, 12:28:03 AM
Teehee, and people who try to deal directly with daimons without knowing what to do generally end up worse for the wear. ...And then try to blame Garret for it. It's lols.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Feylonis on February 01, 2012, 12:39:14 AM
The west realms give their surplus food to the Zuma because that's the only other option to engage them diplomatically. We can't initiate diplomacy in the military sense because the Zuma was superior in that regard. So no, 'stop giving Zuma food' will not fly because that's the only viable bargaining chip the west realms have.

We can't or don't want to ignore the Zuma. Even if we decide to abandon the west realms and live in Darfix, I think the Zuma GM would still find a way to engage player realms...because then, what would be the point of the Zuma? If they exist just to deter playing in the west, then why not just shut down the entire area? It would be a far simpler solution that would cause less drama and headaches. As such, we have to deal with the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 12:41:01 AM
You forgot Asylon!

I generally do.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 01, 2012, 12:41:42 AM
I think some of us are forgetting that the Zuma GM has most likely, in fact, been sitting around alone in the west back when none of us even got close to settling that area.

Why is this important? Because, seeing as how he's done it for such a long time already, and didn't just leave because there was "no reason" for their existence, not initiating contact (You guys realize human characters were the ones to bring to attention to the world that the daimons were around when they were probably always there, right?) So if you go leave them, then it'll be like in the early days when no one even knew there were daimons. It's ridiculous to believe the GM will go pursue realms far away, when for a fairly long time, he has been patiently sitting around in one place not doing anything (that we would know of)

For a more concrete example: Do you guys know about Bowie Ironsides? Yeah, he has a death mark on him by the daimons such that if he sets foot in the west (that they find out about) then things will go bad. But right now? He is enjoying life as a lord in Morek Empire.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 12:46:00 AM
The west realms give their surplus food to the Zuma because that's the only other option to engage them diplomatically. We can't initiate diplomacy in the military sense because the Zuma was superior in that regard. So no, 'stop giving Zuma food' will not fly because that's the only viable bargaining chip the west realms have.

We can't or don't want to ignore the Zuma. Even if we decide to abandon the west realms and live in Darfix, I think the Zuma GM would still find a way to engage player realms...because then, what would be the point of the Zuma? If they exist just to deter playing in the west, then why not just shut down the entire area? It would be a far simpler solution that would cause less drama and headaches. As such, we have to deal with the Zuma.

You know that the whole food thing is kind of recent right? For years the Zuma GM barely engaged player realms, because his role appears to be passive. He does not seek out engagements, he lets players come to him. For YEARS people wondered what the point of the Zuma was since they seemed to do absolutely nothing.

So here is the story, the Zuma started offering huge sums of gold for food. My IC sources indicate this was due to someone approaching them to sell them food, but its still rumours about this. Once they started buying, people saw a way to make A LOT of gold. Food that previously went to D'Hara suddenly had a better market with the Zuma.

Now the Zuma are used to that excess food. Probably they have changed thier culture to even NEED that food to continue the new standard of living. Just cutting off that supply is going to be hard. Probably something people should have thought about before chasing the big pay offs.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 01, 2012, 01:29:20 AM
I generally do.

Yeah and what realm do you come from anyways ?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 01:44:48 AM
Yeah and what realm do you come from anyways ?

Currently, Solaria. Before that PeL, Rivan Empire, Caerwyn, D'Hara, Astrum, D'Hara, Shadovar.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 01, 2012, 02:09:14 AM
Currently, Solaria. Before that PeL, Rivan Empire, Caerwyn, D'Hara, Astrum, D'Hara, Shadovar.

No wonder my character is having to fight yours...no loyalty. jk.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 02:23:16 AM
No wonder my character is having to fight yours...no loyalty. jk.

heh, up until PeL all those moves was so that my character could serve the Dragon Queen. I hear she is currently in Morek, maybe I should look her up.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 01, 2012, 02:27:42 AM
Currently, Solaria. Before that PeL, Rivan Empire, Caerwyn, D'Hara, Astrum, D'Hara, Shadovar.


I served in shadovar and the ravian fiasco for a few weeks before they fell apart and then went on to being awesome since then.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 02:32:48 AM


I served in shadovar and the ravian fiasco for a few weeks before they fell apart and then went on to being awesome since then.

Don't forget your time in Virovene
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 01, 2012, 02:33:53 AM
heh, up until PeL all those moves was so that my character could serve the Dragon Queen. I hear she is currently in Morek, maybe I should look her up.

Not a bad idea, just remember to give back the Poryatown duchy first to its proper Duke. You can take the other 16 with you as well.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 01, 2012, 02:42:18 AM
Not a bad idea, just remember to give back the Poryatown duchy first to its proper Duke.
Poryatown... Poryatown... Doesn't Bowie claim that? I forget... ::)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 02:46:17 AM
Poryatown... Poryatown... Doesn't Bowie claim that? I forget... ::)

Reasonably sure the Dragon Queen claims it as well.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 01, 2012, 03:50:09 AM
Don't forget your time in Virovene

Oh !@#$ it was Virovene, not the Ravian empire... Im drunk
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 01, 2012, 03:56:00 AM
Reasonably sure the Dragon Queen claims it as well.

I think Alanna's claim on the throne of of Pian en Luries is less tenuous than that.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 01, 2012, 03:56:58 AM
I think Alanna's claim on the throne of of Pian en Luries is less tenuous than that.

What will she claim if we destroy Pian En Luries though?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 01, 2012, 04:00:10 AM
Reasonably sure the Dragon Queen claims it as well.

Reasonably Sure both that Anaris is correct, and that the Dragon Queen has less of a claim than whom I was referring to. It is amazing how quickly history is forgotten.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on February 01, 2012, 07:52:50 AM
Reasonably Sure both that Anaris is correct, and that the Dragon Queen has less of a claim than whom I was referring to. It is amazing how quickly history is forgotten.

Poryatown is mine and I will decapitate anyone who tries to take it, just as I took that messenger's leg.  >:(
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 01, 2012, 07:59:08 AM
Poryatown is mine and I will decapitate anyone who tries to take it, just as I took that messenger's leg.  >:(

The interesting thing is that you probably have no idea who I'm referring to.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on February 01, 2012, 08:05:12 AM
The interesting thing is that you probably have no idea who I'm referring to.

About as interesting as a facebook post about generically evil people immediately following a breakup. Sure, I can give you that.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 01, 2012, 08:06:36 AM
About as interesting as a facebook post about generically evil people immediately following a breakup. Sure, I can give you that.

More interesting than the useless arguing that has gone on in this thread so far. Anyway, you'll either find out later, or you'll win.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Valast on February 01, 2012, 04:00:43 PM
Maintaining consistency of a story between multiple GMs is incredibly difficult, especially when the story has a span as long as the Zuma's.

How is it difficult?  IMO you provide the background story... one person provides the goals, restrictions, and intent... and then you allow freedom of the GM's to interact and develop character atmosphere as needed.

The main GM has the control... the other would provide the chances for screwed up relations and mistakes.  *shrug* makes sense to me... helps create the story while not micromanaging the entire thing... and leaves all the openings needed for people to change the world.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 01, 2012, 04:18:10 PM
As has been demonstrated in this particular thread, and others dealing with the Zuma, the players have special expectations of a GM-run realm. They are expected to be 100% consistent, 100% reliable/honest in their dealings, and have extremely accurate continuity. Look at what happened with Vates. He's been gone for years, and people are still complaining that things that Vates told them are not consistent with stuff that the current GM is telling them. Or that deals they worked out with Vates are no longer honored. Stuff like this that happens with normal player realms is shrugged off as par for the course. It just happens. But when it happens with GM controlled realms, even when players are specifically told that current events may not have continuity with old events, such as between 3rd and 4th invasion, they still complain and feel somehow betrayed. I really can't see this changing. Adding more GMs to the Zuma team will not suddenly change player expectations of how a GM realm should be.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 01, 2012, 06:51:27 PM
Maintaining consistency of a story between multiple GMs is incredibly difficult, especially when the story has a span as long as the Zuma's. Just look at what happened with Vates: He created so many storylines for the Zuma but did so without collaboration from Haktoo left no usable notes behind for Haktoo to work with. Or you could look at the disaster that was Netherworld in the fourth invasion where some GMs out right refused to work with others.

And, finally, finding people who have the time, ability and willingness to take on the role of a GM is not easy. It is hard, thankless work where you will hear about everything you do wrong and very little about what you do right.

I have already made a plausible response to how to resolve this.

Multiple, rotating GMs with overlapping "terms" and a broad understanding among players that the daimons are truly different, with different goals and knowledge, not merely contrived personalities. Make it essentially like a human realm, except played by GMs.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 01, 2012, 06:51:50 PM
The difference is, none of those realms you mentioned, as far as I'm aware, has Garret Artemesia for an ambassador. That's my only beef with the Zuma, really.

There is being a bully, and then there is cartoonish, supervillainy trolling.

This.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 01, 2012, 06:58:02 PM
As has been demonstrated in this particular thread, and others dealing with the Zuma, the players have special expectations of a GM-run realm. They are expected to be 100% consistent, 100% reliable/honest in their dealings, and have extremely accurate continuity. Look at what happened with Vates. He's been gone for years, and people are still complaining that things that Vates told them are not consistent with stuff that the current GM is telling them. Or that deals they worked out with Vates are no longer honored. Stuff like this that happens with normal player realms is shrugged off as par for the course. It just happens. But when it happens with GM controlled realms, even when players are specifically told that current events may not have continuity with old events, such as between 3rd and 4th invasion, they still complain and feel somehow betrayed. I really can't see this changing. Adding more GMs to the Zuma team will not suddenly change player expectations of how a GM realm should be.

No, it would.

Because I do not find it credible that the GM will organize a rebel group and have a rebellion against himself.

I find it more credible that a second GM might, especially if each GM was assigned different objectives.

Changing the structure of the GMing will radically alter player perceptions, and radically alter how the GMs play, especially if every GM is given different objectives, and every GM has some kind of plausible incentive structure: maybe their "term" lasts only until some variable is exhausted by their actions, maybe a fixed time, it hardly matters, as long as it is small enough that players could figure it out in a reasonable character's timeframe, and as long as the broad reasoning behind the shift can be discerned.

Players expect consistency because we know it is one GM. We don't expect that kind of consistency from human realms.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 01, 2012, 07:09:33 PM
Because I do not find it credible that the GM will organize a rebel group and have a rebellion against himself.

I find it more credible that a second GM might, especially if each GM was assigned different objectives.

If Tom forbids rebellions amongst the Zuma, then there will be none, however many GMs there are.

If Tom decides that there should be a rebellion amongst the Zuma, there will be one, however few GMs there are.

Do you really think that the GMs are free to just do whatever the hell they want?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 01, 2012, 07:10:34 PM
Because I do not find it credible that the GM will organize a rebel group and have a rebellion against himself.

I find it more credible that a second GM might, especially if each GM was assigned different objectives.
Except that I can almost 100% guarantee that nothing of the sort would happen. GM realms are not implemented just so they can be just another realm, but with Super Soldiers for troops.

Quote
Players expect consistency because we know it is one GM. We don't expect that kind of consistency from human realms.
Yeah, I think we've already proved that's simply not true. Exhibit A: Vates. Case closed.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Sacha on February 01, 2012, 07:37:01 PM
What I wonder is this:

1. Pretty much from the start of Dwilight, it was known that there was a Daimon presence in the west.
2. Daimons were at the time known to be immensely powerful and very dangerous, and are not subject to any code of honor or even reasoning on a human level.
3. Daimons were known to raise huge armies that could trampled all but the greatest human armies thrown against them.
4. Western Dwilight was as far from civilization as could be at the opening of Dwilight.

Taking these facts into account, it's only logical that the closer you put yourself to Daimons and whatever minions/servants/allies they have, the closer you put yourself to danger in the form of irrational and enormously powerful beings who see humans as glorified vermin. So, by colonizing the west, you intentionally put yourself in the Daimons' crosshairs.

And somehow it's the GMs' fault that you got stomped on?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 02, 2012, 03:34:42 AM
Except that I can almost 100% guarantee that nothing of the sort would happen. GM realms are not implemented just so they can be just another realm, but with Super Soldiers for troops.
Yeah, I think we've already proved that's simply not true. Exhibit A: Vates. Case closed.

No, if Vates was still around, but Haktoo was doing this stuff, I wouldn't be complaining at all on here. I'd be ICly scheming with Vates.

Or, even if both GMs were unified, I'd play nice, wait for the "Time of Haktoo" to end, and buddy up with the next Daimon overlord.

The problem with Vates is that there were multiple GMs but now there aren't.

Sacha (can't quote a quote apparently):

Point 2 is wrong. Daimons were not known to be immensely powerful. Back when those regions were not the Zuma Coalition, but rather just "Zuma" (and even the early days of the Zuma Coalition), the daimons usually only fielded armies of 2000 or 3000 CS per unit. One or two Zuma regions actually went rogue a few times, and the daimons lost some battles to rogues. And, even then, after the grew so powerful, the Zuma Coalition was very benign for a long time.

Furthermore, western colonization happened before we knew about the Zuma. Melodia predates general knowledge of the Zuma. Terran's encounters, to my knowledge, are when the Zuma began to get more publicity.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Chenier on February 02, 2012, 04:02:25 AM
I have already made a plausible response to how to resolve this.

Multiple, rotating GMs with overlapping "terms" and a broad understanding among players that the daimons are truly different, with different goals and knowledge, not merely contrived personalities. Make it essentially like a human realm, except played by GMs.

This.

And I can't for the love of god understand what's so hard about writing simple "cole's notes" kind of bulletpoints for internal use. Why is it so godawful difficult for the GMs to write down notes of important events for the next guys to follow.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 02, 2012, 04:14:26 AM
This.
...would be an unmitigated disaster.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on February 02, 2012, 04:37:04 AM
No, if Vates was still around, but Haktoo was doing this stuff, I wouldn't be complaining at all on here. I'd be ICly scheming with Vates.

Or, even if both GMs were unified, I'd play nice, wait for the "Time of Haktoo" to end, and buddy up with the next Daimon overlord.

The problem with Vates is that there were multiple GMs but now there aren't.

Sacha (can't quote a quote apparently):

Point 2 is wrong. Daimons were not known to be immensely powerful. Back when those regions were not the Zuma Coalition, but rather just "Zuma" (and even the early days of the Zuma Coalition), the daimons usually only fielded armies of 2000 or 3000 CS per unit. One or two Zuma regions actually went rogue a few times, and the daimons lost some battles to rogues. And, even then, after the grew so powerful, the Zuma Coalition was very benign for a long time.

Furthermore, western colonization happened before we knew about the Zuma. Melodia predates general knowledge of the Zuma. Terran's encounters, to my knowledge, are when the Zuma began to get more publicity.

You know I have to point out that Silverfire (I think it was him) had a very good point about this. Maybe the Zuma were weak before because they only had their own resources to fall back on. Then everyone started selling them enormous quantities of food. Given how much they pay for it, doesn't it make sense that it's far more valuable to them than gold? Has anyone thought about why that might be? Maybe, just maybe, you've been feeding the beast, as it were. Maybe all that extra food is what is allowing them to maintain such enormous armies.

And, though I've largely supported the anti-Zuma people in this thread, I do agree that the multiple GM idea is wishful thinking. For one thing, it's been mentioned numerous times in numerous places that it is very difficult to recruit GMs who are willing and able to dedicate large amounts of time to their roles. And now you're demanding that instead of one Tom recruits a squad of them, who will not only devote all that time to their IC efforts, but also take extra time to make 100% thorough and accurate crib notes to share with all their peers detailing their every move so that they can all march in lockstep and no plot hook is ever left behind? They're not exactly getting paid for what they do you know...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Sacha on February 02, 2012, 08:29:47 AM


Point 2 is wrong. Daimons were not known to be immensely powerful. Back when those regions were not the Zuma Coalition, but rather just "Zuma" (and even the early days of the Zuma Coalition), the daimons usually only fielded armies of 2000 or 3000 CS per unit. One or two Zuma regions actually went rogue a few times, and the daimons lost some battles to rogues. And, even then, after the grew so powerful, the Zuma Coalition was very benign for a long time.

Furthermore, western colonization happened before we knew about the Zuma. Melodia predates general knowledge of the Zuma. Terran's encounters, to my knowledge, are when the Zuma began to get more publicity.

I'm not talking about just Zuma, I'm talking about Daimons as a whole. They'd kicked ass all over BT at the time, so we knew what they were capable of.

And I'm pretty sure that the presence of the Zuma was revealed fairly early on... A few months after Dwilight opened, a long time before Terran existed.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 02, 2012, 11:45:14 AM
I believe we tried something similar to the multiple GMs idea in the 4th Inv. That resulted in seemingly disorganization. Well, don't let me judge it. You tell me, what did you think of that plan? In the Netherworld there were no less than 3 different GMs at any one time (I think...Sherilynn, the Nyghts, the Valitorres, at one point the of the Zumas) And how did that go?

If I remember correctly, there was some deal of confusion, which as it is somewhat known now, might have been the intent there. But mostly that came from OOC confusion, which is undesirable. With the Zuma on Dwilight it's probably not intended that we have multiple voices to listen to, to figure out which one we want.

But to reiterate: Remember 4th Inv and the player responses then to the multiple GMs? And how there was no "consistency"? Here, we thusfar only had 2 GMs among the Zuma: The Daimonbreeds and the of the Zumas. Once the of the Zumas left there has seemingly already been a plot vacuum perceived by some players who dealt with Vates. Can you imagine what would happen if in addition to that we had, say, the Nyghts?

I would predict then that there would be different complaints, mainly that there are too many GMs, thus confusing the plot, or making it too messy for players to follow (Which has been a perennial Invasion complaint).

The rotating GMs idea would only exacerbate the problem of consistency. Think about it: How much do you really think the GMs collaborate? And even if they did, it's hard to communicate some things enough face to face, many times harder when it's through text over the Internet. There will be miscommunications and misunderstandings, and they will snowball into bigger problems. And players will catch on to that and start attacking those weaknesses which are only natural results of the inherent weaknesses in human communication.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Feylonis on February 02, 2012, 06:51:59 PM
Zuma's existence did become known a few months after Dwilight opened, but other than the name, it was all a big question mark for the continent. People only started knowing more detailed things about them when Terran began engagement and interaction.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 02, 2012, 07:29:09 PM
I believe we tried something similar to the multiple GMs idea in the 4th Inv. That resulted in seemingly disorganization. Well, don't let me judge it. You tell me, what did you think of that plan? In the Netherworld there were no less than 3 different GMs at any one time (I think...Sherilynn, the Nyghts, the Valitorres, at one point the of the Zumas) And how did that go?

If I remember correctly, there was some deal of confusion, which as it is somewhat known now, might have been the intent there. But mostly that came from OOC confusion, which is undesirable. With the Zuma on Dwilight it's probably not intended that we have multiple voices to listen to, to figure out which one we want.

But to reiterate: Remember 4th Inv and the player responses then to the multiple GMs? And how there was no "consistency"? Here, we thusfar only had 2 GMs among the Zuma: The Daimonbreeds and the of the Zumas. Once the of the Zumas left there has seemingly already been a plot vacuum perceived by some players who dealt with Vates. Can you imagine what would happen if in addition to that we had, say, the Nyghts?

I would predict then that there would be different complaints, mainly that there are too many GMs, thus confusing the plot, or making it too messy for players to follow (Which has been a perennial Invasion complaint).

The rotating GMs idea would only exacerbate the problem of consistency. Think about it: How much do you really think the GMs collaborate? And even if they did, it's hard to communicate some things enough face to face, many times harder when it's through text over the Internet. There will be miscommunications and misunderstandings, and they will snowball into bigger problems. And players will catch on to that and start attacking those weaknesses which are only natural results of the inherent weaknesses in human communication.

I would rather have multiple GM's to deal with, because then there would be a reason for misunderstandings.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on February 02, 2012, 07:42:57 PM
I would rather have multiple GM's to deal with, because then there would be a reason for misunderstandings.

...because massive cultural differences aren't one?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Sacha on February 02, 2012, 08:59:42 PM
Zuma's existence did become known a few months after Dwilight opened, but other than the name, it was all a big question mark for the continent. People only started knowing more detailed things about them when Terran began engagement and interaction.

Irrelevant. It was known they were associated with Daimons, and Daimons were known to be a grave danger.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 02, 2012, 09:03:05 PM
Irrelevant. It was known they were associated with Daimons, and Daimons were known to be a grave danger.

Daimons were known to be cooperative, reasonable, sometimes almost nice folks.

I don't know what your character was doing during the 4th Invasion.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 02, 2012, 09:03:51 PM
...would be an unmitigated disaster.

You have players in multiple realms who have invested large amounts of time engaging in suicide RP-plots and seriously looking at leaving Dwilight or BM entirely.

There is already a disaster.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 02, 2012, 09:06:45 PM
Daimons were known to be cooperative, reasonable, sometimes almost nice folks.

I don't know what your character was doing during the 4th Invasion.

Heh..haha...you're...you're joking, right? Like, OOCly, you are in fact, joking, yes?

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 02, 2012, 09:07:05 PM
You know I have to point out that Silverfire (I think it was him) had a very good point about this. Maybe the Zuma were weak before because they only had their own resources to fall back on. Then everyone started selling them enormous quantities of food. Given how much they pay for it, doesn't it make sense that it's far more valuable to them than gold? Has anyone thought about why that might be? Maybe, just maybe, you've been feeding the beast, as it were. Maybe all that extra food is what is allowing them to maintain such enormous armies.

And, though I've largely supported the anti-Zuma people in this thread, I do agree that the multiple GM idea is wishful thinking. For one thing, it's been mentioned numerous times in numerous places that it is very difficult to recruit GMs who are willing and able to dedicate large amounts of time to their roles. And now you're demanding that instead of one Tom recruits a squad of them, who will not only devote all that time to their IC efforts, but also take extra time to make 100% thorough and accurate crib notes to share with all their peers detailing their every move so that they can all march in lockstep and no plot hook is ever left behind? They're not exactly getting paid for what they do you know...

So what do you propose we do? Hm?

Terran has only sold small amounts of food very sporadically, and only when we felt it was necessary for our survival. I guess maybe Asylon is selling tons of food. But, again, what do you propose we do? Attack Asylon because they're helping the Zuma? I don't think the Zuma would like that, for some reason. Madina sold food... and the Zuma are no threat to Madina.

The problem here is that a trader could come over all the way from, say, Morek, and sell food to the Zuma, and thus strengthen them against the Moot. And there is no "Arrest trader" option to my knowledge.

Again, one or two nobles operating secretly, quietly, or even accidentally could set off the chain reaction with food that makes the Zuma "Too big to fight."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 02, 2012, 09:07:58 PM
Heh..haha...you're...you're joking, right? Like, OOCly, you are in fact, joking, yes?

Not in the slightest.

3rd Invasion too (I think...?) Hireshmont had a number of pleasant conversations with folks in Vlaanderen, and even one or two with Arcane (I quite liked Arcane).
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 02, 2012, 09:23:46 PM
Ok, here's a thought. I've tried to be strictly objective for this bit.

BM is a large game. There have been many players who have quit en masse for several reasons. Among them were dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the game, or losing the war. I cannot cite every single reason, but if you wish to poll everyone (Try loren actually, since he's been around a long time) then you'll likely discover that we have lost large groups of players for a diverse number of reasons. We did not exactly alter things just to accomodate those players.

Now, let's look at the current situation in regard to this "disaster".

First, Dwilight accounts for 1/6 of BM's total continents. That means that even if Dwilight is totally rotten, BM itself is still 5/6 not rotten (unless you have complaints there in which case it's no longer just about the Zuma).

Second, the Zuma actually account for very little of Dwilight's actual mass, and their influence area is actually very small. If you do not believe me, please recall what Bowie Ironsides did. There were declarations for his execution, and that any realm that harbored him would face consequences. Well, Barca made him their Duke of Rettleville shortly after they formed. For that, the Zuma marched on them. But, before that, Summerdale harbored him. The King of Summerdale even told the Zuma essentially to piss off. You will notice that Summerdale never saw the slightest hint of daimon. And now? Bowie lives nicely as Lord of Ashrak in the Morek Empire. And the Morek Empire has not seen the slightest hint of daimon.

What this means is that the GM controlled realm is actually a very small blip in the entirety of BM as a game. I do not think that such a small blip would justifiably "ruin the game" for many people, because there is still so much more to BM than just Dwilight and for that matter, just West Dwilight. If those people cannot open their eyes that there is a bigger BM world out there, then it is unfortunate. However, I do not believe that we would be justified in making such changes to something that accounts for so little of the game just to satisfy a small minority of players. What our efforts should focus on, rather, is making the game actually stable again, and improving the real pulls of BM like battling.

And if you would just step back a moment, you too will realize that Dwilight as a whole even accounts for very little of the BM experience. Even much less important is the west where the Zuma actually might plausibly influence.

So I will remain diplomatic through all this and say that, based on the objective contribution of Dwilight to the game it belongs to, and the further weight of the Zuma in Dwilight, it does not appear justified to me that we should focus any resources towards modifying the current system in order to potentially retain a very small amount of characters/players who might very well quit for other reasons that have to do with dissatisfaction with other aspects of the game.

Remember: BM is what we're playing. Dwilight is just a tiny part of it. The take-home lesson might be to keep your options open, and not to get too attached to a GAME character.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 02, 2012, 09:32:31 PM
You have players in multiple realms who have invested large amounts of time engaging in suicide RP-plots and seriously looking at leaving Dwilight or BM entirely.

There is already a disaster.

I'm sorry, but that's more a reflection on the absurdly melodramatic natures of the players involved than on the seriousness of the actual problem.

Honestly, I haven't really seen anything serious come from the anti-Zuma faction that doesn't boil down to either, "Having GM characters on Dwilight is bad, no matter what they do," or "They mess up all my plans, which players are allowed to do, but GMs are not allowed to do."

Neither of these strikes me as a reasonable argument.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 02, 2012, 10:00:13 PM
There is already a disaster.
Which will not be solved by some "rotating GM" scheme. You'll just be trading one perceived problem: there's only one GM so we can't play the NPCs off of each other, for another guaranteed problem: the inconsistencies in continuity. We already know that the players *will* complain bitterly about even the most trivial inconsistency problems between GM stories/RPs. It happened in the third invasion, it happened again in the fourth invasion, it happened with the difference in stories between the third and fourth invasion even after it had been made clear that there was only passing similarity between the two, and it happened between the current ZumaGM and the Vates-GM. Players will twig to those differences and start bitching. They're not going to suddenly change their tune because, hey, it's the Zuma this time. Nor do I think that simply adding a second/third/Nth GM to the Zuma team will make much difference either. You still won't be able to play them off against each other or drive wedges between them the way you could do with player run realms. GM/NPC factions don't work that way. It may increase the total time that the GMs have to engage in RP. Or increase the total number of GM characters available. (Which, by the way, would reduce the weakness of the Zuma that many people have been plotting to take advantage of.) But it's not going to mean that you could take advantage of political tensions and ambitions of individual daimon characters.

But... meh... this discussion really isn't going anywhere. We're just talking in circles.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Bjarnson on February 02, 2012, 10:18:45 PM
So what do you propose we do? Hm?

Terran has only sold small amounts of food very sporadically, and only when we felt it was necessary for our survival. I guess maybe Asylon is selling tons of food. But, again, what do you propose we do? Attack Asylon because they're helping the Zuma? I don't think the Zuma would like that, for some reason.


And how large amounts do you or others suspect/estimate we of Asylon has sold to the Daimons? How large quantity would justify such attack, and how large of the Daimons food supply would we need to be to earn their protection?

Because if you know theese numbers please share with me, because I only know the first one and I am keeping it to myself. But it would be kinda helpful to know how much more I need to increase my sales with to be provided the "Oh so feared"-Daimon protection.

(Just incase someone would attack us, because everyone knows that Asylon cant field an army of their own, especially now since we got our monster problems under control and starting to get our regions in shape.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 03, 2012, 12:24:25 AM
We hardly manage to get food supply to them. I actually found out that since the Queen left there hasn't been more than maybe 1 sale. We have sold food to the Daimons as we would sell it to anyone. Was it the right choice, hindsight 20/20. We needed the gold during the bad monster invasions it served its purpose. If we hadn't fed the Daimons perhaps they would have been more aggressive and raided outside their lands before all this... Catch-22.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 01:21:34 AM
Quote
Honestly, I haven't really seen anything serious come from the anti-Zuma faction that doesn't boil down to either, "Having GM characters on Dwilight is bad, no matter what they do," or "They mess up all my plans, which players are allowed to do, but GMs are not allowed to do."

I can only speak for myself, but I came to BM to play in a medieval setting against other players. I came to Dwilight for SMA. Dwilight today has neither SMA nor much to do with other players (in my part of the world, at least).

I don't think it's possible or desirable to somehow prove empirically that GM characters are bad.  In real life the players pick the GM and they all talk about the nature of the game they're going to play.  Of course, there are reciprocal disadvantages for the GM -- you don't get to pick your players and you can't possibly tailor what you do to a handful of players.

I guess I just feel as though, if you asked me to stir things up on a continent in Battlemaster, there is so much possibility within the scope of regular feudal intrigue, so much content to be mined from a properly serious medieval atmosphere, that I wonder what the advantage of the Zuma is. I freely admit to being ignorant about a lot of what is going on, but part of the fun should be in the discovery; but I don't see how I'm meant to do that. There are no descriptions in the Zuma regions except for the Volcano, and it's not much of one. The writing style behind the Daimons is childish, on purpose to be sure, but this makes it difficult for them to be good villains, if that is even what they are meant to be.  The Zuma and the Daimons are scary only in game-terms and CS. They can knock down our game pieces. But that's the easiest tool at a GM's disposal. I'm hoping for a '...so what?'
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2012, 02:28:30 AM
I can only speak for myself, but I came to BM to play in a medieval setting against other players. I came to Dwilight for SMA. Dwilight today has neither SMA nor much to do with other players (in my part of the world, at least).

I don't think it's possible or desirable to somehow prove empirically that GM characters are bad.  In real life the players pick the GM and they all talk about the nature of the game they're going to play.  Of course, there are reciprocal disadvantages for the GM -- you don't get to pick your players and you can't possibly tailor what you do to a handful of players.

I guess I just feel as though, if you asked me to stir things up on a continent in Battlemaster, there is so much possibility within the scope of regular feudal intrigue, so much content to be mined from a properly serious medieval atmosphere, that I wonder what the advantage of the Zuma is. I freely admit to being ignorant about a lot of what is going on, but part of the fun should be in the discovery; but I don't see how I'm meant to do that. There are no descriptions in the Zuma regions except for the Volcano, and it's not much of one. The writing style behind the Daimons is childish, on purpose to be sure, but this makes it difficult for them to be good villains, if that is even what they are meant to be.  The Zuma and the Daimons are scary only in game-terms and CS. They can knock down our game pieces. But that's the easiest tool at a GM's disposal. I'm hoping for a '...so what?'

Wiki, every region has a description is just hasn't made its way in game for some of them

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Evenfell

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Overroot

http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Underroot

In terms of writing style, its a pretty standard form to convey that the language we are conversing in is not their native language, while ensuring it is still accessible. Just my opinion, the Zuma aren't MEANT to be villains. If the were they would have been active against human realms long long ago, and would be doing much more damage then they currently are.

If you want to learn what the Zuma are doing I see two obvious ways. First establish communications with those that deal with them, Terran, Barca and the like. Second, send a character to visit them and talk to them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 03, 2012, 02:51:38 AM
So what do you propose we do? Hm?

Terran has only sold small amounts of food very sporadically, and only when we felt it was necessary for our survival. I guess maybe Asylon is selling tons of food. But, again, what do you propose we do? Attack Asylon because they're helping the Zuma? I don't think the Zuma would like that, for some reason. Madina sold food... and the Zuma are no threat to Madina.

The problem here is that a trader could come over all the way from, say, Morek, and sell food to the Zuma, and thus strengthen them against the Moot. And there is no "Arrest trader" option to my knowledge.

Again, one or two nobles operating secretly, quietly, or even accidentally could set off the chain reaction with food that makes the Zuma "Too big to fight."

Attack the Player realms because they are feeding potential enemies? Yes, absolutely. Perhaps that is one of the reasons the Zuma are there? To cause contention between player realms so that the game remains interesting?

You can't say for sure that the Zuma would do anything about you attacking Asylon because you haven't tried it. My personal opinion is they would do all of nothing about it. Especially if you made the smart decision to create a reason for war that completely ignored the Zuma. If they are at war, they can't possibly continue to sell food because you'll be burning their food stores. At the end of the war you can make terms of conditions that any food surplus they have MUST be sold only to Terran or kept in surplus.

There, you've accomplished keeping the Zuma weak, while never letting on that's what you were doing.

As far as operating secretly and selling the Zuma food, I find that hard to actually accomplish until this new trade system was produced. How is a trader going to explain a journey into Zuma lands, when he has to pass through or around your realm to reach them?

Truthfully though, this whole conversation is starting to bore me because it seems no one is even interested in trying to figure out what makes the Zuma tick. They have a set of rules to follow and their actions betray what those rules are if you pay attention closely. I know its been said that ppl don't care to try and figure out the Zuma at all, then they don't have to do that either. You CAN pretty much ignore the Zuma if you want to, especially if you don't choose to stay right next to them. As far as I can tell, aside from some random threats, the Zuma have done no more dmg to any realm on Dwilight that random monster and undead attacks haven't done to realms. In fact, while the Zuma have destroyed zero realms, rogue spawns have destroyed multiple realms of Dwilight. If your realm was destroyed by the Zuma with no reason given, then sure get upset. If they attack your army and decimate it once or twice and you "maybe" lose a single region, there is really no reason to complain, especially when in recent days your ruler has begun to purposefully annoy the Zuma.

The Zuma have a driving force behind them, and stuff they rely on to make them strong. I'm not going to give it away, because aside from an OOC perspective that I think that ruins the game, from an IC perspective I like Luria knowing more about the Zuma's intents than those who would possibly interfere with Luria if they were free to do so.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 03:24:59 AM
Quote
Truthfully though, this whole conversation is starting to bore me because it seems no one is even interested in trying to figure out what makes the Zuma tick.

My character is standing in a volcano and has just asked Haktoo what makes her tick.

The trouble, though, regardless of the response my character gets (which may well be to get his head chopped off at the rate he's going) -- the Zuma don't really make me want to know what's making them tick. They're not intriguing. I get the explanation for their language but that doesn't mean it isn't a handicap.

I would challenge anyone with the unfortunate job of running the Zuma to run them without a great CS advantage. It's too much of an easy I Win button and that dominates the way most people think about them. I'm enjoying myself on Dwilight more than usual (which is to say, at all) because I don't care if my character dies and my character cares less if he dies than most do (since he's old).

SMA done right breeds interesting characters. Putting a force on the game board with a whole lot of power makes people pay attention but it doesn't make them interesting. I'm not saying that there aren't a dozen interesting things about them that I'm just not privy to, either. But the structural problems make it very unlikely that many of those things will be revealed. Think about some medieval antagonists: Eleanor of Aquitaine or any of the princes in Lion in Winter, Robert the Bruce in Braveheart, or even Denethor in LOTR. They are complex characters with often conflicting goals that get them into trouble. An antagonist ought to be able to muck up the natural order of things somewhat, but with finesse - not by merely stomping on the board until the pieces fall off.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2012, 03:56:39 AM
My character is standing in a volcano and has just asked Haktoo what makes her tick.

The trouble, though, regardless of the response my character gets (which may well be to get his head chopped off at the rate he's going) -- the Zuma don't really make me want to know what's making them tick. They're not intriguing. I get the explanation for their language but that doesn't mean it isn't a handicap.

I would challenge anyone with the unfortunate job of running the Zuma to run them without a great CS advantage. It's too much of an easy I Win button and that dominates the way most people think about them. I'm enjoying myself on Dwilight more than usual (which is to say, at all) because I don't care if my character dies and my character cares less if he dies than most do (since he's old).

SMA done right breeds interesting characters. Putting a force on the game board with a whole lot of power makes people pay attention but it doesn't make them interesting. I'm not saying that there aren't a dozen interesting things about them that I'm just not privy to, either. But the structural problems make it very unlikely that many of those things will be revealed. Think about some medieval antagonists: Eleanor of Aquitaine or any of the princes in Lion in Winter, Robert the Bruce in Braveheart, or even Denethor in LOTR. They are complex characters with often conflicting goals that get them into trouble. An antagonist ought to be able to muck up the natural order of things somewhat, but with finesse - not by merely stomping on the board until the pieces fall off.

You are joking right? Until recently the Zuma didn't HAVE a CS advantage, at least not compared to realms like Astrum. These large armies are a recent thing.

Get OVER the idea that the Zuma are the antagonist of the island. They might be that is true, but their is nothing to suggest that actually is there role. In fact if we look at how things have panned out recently it would appear that they are more a resource for canny player antagonist to use, with the associated risks if you don't approach things correctly.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Dante Silverfire on February 03, 2012, 04:09:29 AM
My character is standing in a volcano and has just asked Haktoo what makes her tick.

Did you read the rest of what I said in that paragraph?

Anyway, that isn't exactly the best way to go about things. If you asked a foreign ruler, what the secret weakness to their armies was, do you think they would tell you? Would they tell you where the backdoor entrance to their castle is, so that you could attack them easier?

Granted, that may work if you use the right persuasive techniques. Just saying, if it doesn't that doesn't mean there is no way to find out.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on February 03, 2012, 05:20:27 AM
You are joking right? Until recently the Zuma didn't HAVE a CS advantage, at least not compared to realms like Astrum. These large armies are a recent thing.

Get OVER the idea that the Zuma are the antagonist of the island. They might be that is true, but their is nothing to suggest that actually is there role. In fact if we look at how things have panned out recently it would appear that they are more a resource for canny player antagonist to use, with the associated risks if you don't approach things correctly.

Any realm that can raise daimon and monster units will *always* have a combat advantage no matter what the CS numbers have to say about it. The point he was making was, put the hammer out of sight for a bit and try out some of the other tools in your kit to drive your story or engage the players or whatever the point of the Zuma is. They're more than just an unstoppable army, but it's awfully hard to think of them as anything but that when they're melting your face (or threatening to) every other week.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 03, 2012, 05:37:54 AM
Any realm that can raise daimon and monster units will *always* have a combat advantage no matter what the CS numbers have to say about it. The point he was making was, put the hammer out of sight for a bit and try out some of the other tools in your kit to drive your story or engage the players or whatever the point of the Zuma is. They're more than just an unstoppable army, but it's awfully hard to think of them as anything but that when they're melting your face (or threatening to) every other week.

The Hammer is still only being used in very few interactions really. Sure we SEE the hammer, cause its more obvious, however there are plenty of interactions happening right now that don't involve a hammer at all. I guess the problem tends to be, the whole continent can easily see when they are using the hammer, while only a select few tend to see the other interactions.

Mind you it is always possible that certain people IG are over reporting the use of the hammer as well. I know from the Luria region we aren't receiving in game messages that would allow us to know if the reports of a rampage are true or not. Could well be that those reporting it to us are lying.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on February 03, 2012, 06:37:46 AM
Yes, but it's the hammer that has everyone up in arms regardless of what percentage of interactions it makes up.

And if you include all of the interaction that revolves around threatening to use the hammer and dictating what it will take to prevent the hammer from coming down, I'd guess that a fairly high percentage of their activity lately has revolved around it based solely on the number of incidents that I know about in recent months.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 03, 2012, 07:39:52 AM
I'm sorry, but that's more a reflection on the absurdly melodramatic natures of the players involved than on the seriousness of the actual problem.

I agree; Artemesia is pretty melodramatic.

Honestly, I haven't really seen anything serious come from the anti-Zuma faction that doesn't boil down to either, "Having GM characters on Dwilight is bad, no matter what they do," or "They mess up all my plans, which players are allowed to do, but GMs are not allowed to do."

No. I want more GMs, not less. I'm fine with GMs ROTFLstomping Terran if they want. I'm fine with GMs doing nothing at all. It's the sporadic, hit-or-miss unreliable behavior that bothers me. And even that wouldn't bother me if there were any discernible way the Zuma could be divided, co-opted, or conquered. But, as it is, the Zuma are strong enough to require constant attention, but do very little with it, meaning it's boring.

Please, burn Terran to the ground. Or go back to your Volcano and starve. But don't squat on Terran's borders with 20,000 CS then tell me, "Play as usual! Just pretend like we're not even here, and you'll be fine!"

Neither of these strikes me as a reasonable argument.

I agree. And neither of them happens to be the argument I have been making for the last 30+ pages.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 03, 2012, 08:55:04 AM
It's like 'Nam guys, if you weren't there you just don't know!
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Jhaelen Irsei on February 03, 2012, 11:05:37 AM
You are joking right? Until recently the Zuma didn't HAVE a CS advantage, at least not compared to realms like Astrum. These large armies are a recent thing.

Get OVER the idea that the Zuma are the antagonist of the island. They might be that is true, but their is nothing to suggest that actually is there role. In fact if we look at how things have panned out recently it would appear that they are more a resource for canny player antagonist to use, with the associated risks if you don't approach things correctly.

This is the interesting thing of the Zumas indeed. They're not the regular Daimons from pop culture (comics, movie, etc).

They're a localized force tough, in East Dwilight they don't play any role and this causes a "shift" in players' experience on Dwilight.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: fodder on February 03, 2012, 11:11:41 AM

I would challenge anyone with the unfortunate job of running the Zuma to run them without a great CS advantage. It's too much of an easy I Win button and that dominates the way most people think about them. I'm enjoying myself on Dwilight more than usual (which is to say, at all) because I don't care if my character dies and my character cares less if he dies than most do (since he's old).


... why should it not win?
Quote
And even that wouldn't bother me if there were any discernible way the Zuma could be divided, co-opted, or conquered.

why should there be a need for that to happen to zuma?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Carna on February 03, 2012, 11:28:29 AM
When the !@#$ hit the fan between the Zuma Coalition and Barca, two things happened. Dramatic decline in activity levels and the loss of at least a couple of players. I know its directly related because my brother was one of the players. I wasn't too far from not bothering myself. They are an unbeatable force that can randomly stand up and walk over anyone in their path. "It adds an element of danger" is a poxy excuse for someone going on an ego trip. I'm absolutely fine with going up against a vastly superior force, so long as I know I'm not wasting my time putting up a fight. As far as insta-kill jobs like the Zuma are in play, what's the point? The admin will either stop at some point or not.

It may be considered a wonderful attraction and a damn good reason to join neighbouring realms like Barca and Terran, but I'd bet the vast majority of people in that mindframe are not in Barca or Terran or Asylon. They do not make it fun to play. They have caused players to stop playing. And as for myself, I could just move realm if I don't like it, but why should I bother? Its as easy to just ignore they exist and let the admin do what they're going to do. Not like there's a chance of stopping them from doing just that. And therein lies why I am one of the people who said I "hated" them. Too strong a word, but I definiately don't appreciate them or think they're a brilliant part of the game. More like the most off-putting.

Finn.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2012, 01:09:25 PM
No. I want more GMs, not less. I'm fine with GMs ROTFLstomping Terran if they want. I'm fine with GMs doing nothing at all. It's the sporadic, hit-or-miss unreliable behavior that bothers me. And even that wouldn't bother me if there were any discernible way the Zuma could be divided, co-opted, or conquered. But, as it is, the Zuma are strong enough to require constant attention, but do very little with it, meaning it's boring.

Vellos, you haven't been listening, so I'm going to get out my chloroform and tattoo needles, knock you out, and tattoo the following in reverse on your forehead:

It doesn't matter how many GMs there are, Tom still won't let you turn the Zuma against each other.

OK, now look in the mirror.

Turn away.

Now look in the mirror again, and notice that it's still there.

Read it.

Does that help you understand why your argument makes no bloody sense whatsoever?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 03, 2012, 01:26:17 PM
Here's a chilling fact: The Zuma GM who plays the Daimonbreeds does not go out of his way to bother human realms. Really, his MO seems to be to sit in his regions doing nothing, which is the very nothing that some people have said was boring not too long ago. Seriously he sits in his regions doing nothing (or the closest thing to nothing that is possible). He's done that for a very very long time already, and when complaints were getting heated here, and I suggested that we once more withdraw and do nothing so people could cool down, he declined out of interest and respect for the interactions you people who are now complaining have initiated. So be a little humble to know that you're playing with someone who's so accomodating. I know I'd probably not make the same decision.

Now, usually things only happen if people go into Zumalands. This is important because most of the time the only way that a remote message gets acknowledged is something that people don't appreciate and ironically even attack. Most of those realms don't even know how lucky they are. (People will roll their eyes and be like "there goes Artemesia being all pseudocryptic with his nonsense again". Makes me sometimes want to just sit back, relax, and watch people fail on their own. Least then no one can blame me for anything.)

We have yet to hear from the player behind Flavia, who actually managed to become ruler because she was slick enough to figure out how to essentially use the daimons to put herself on the throne. We have yet to hear from the player behind Edmund Ryan in Summerdale. Remember, Summerdale before had declarations against it because they harbored Bowie. Those declarations have since been dissolved. Wonder why, hmmm...?

You could also try to find the myriad of repeat sellers who have gone in and out of the Zuma Coalition with neither incidence to themselves or their realms. Madina is a perennial favorite. Sure, they had that one hitch when Vesna was still around, but since then, they've pretty much been number one in terms of people coming into Zuma lands. Also number one for people who go away without causing any trouble. Go ask them what their secret is, since they're definitely close enough to see daimons breathing down their necks.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 02:14:12 PM
The extent to which the people involved with the Zuma or with the devs have the attitude of the exasperated babysitter is remarkable. This is typically a sign of a death spiral in any campaign. You're talking to Vellos like he's a child when he's the guy who is most directly concerned with the Zuma as he lives next door. Maybe he doesn't have to like the Zuma, but who, exactly, do you think you are serving? Yourselves? Some nonspecific players who are reveling in all this? What is your mission as GMs and developers, and how do you measure the success of that mission?

I don't have a pony in this show. I don't care at all about what happens to my Dwilight toon, but this entire thread consists of people registering varying degrees of legitimate complaints and then being told how wrong they are for complaining. I understand how frustrating dealing with players can be, but at some point it seems to me that it doesn't matter if you think they're all morons if what you are doing is not having the desired effect.

Two out of every four good players playing within my bm-o-sphere in 2007 and 2008 left when the game terms were being dictated by region maintenance and TMP. Another one out of four left after SMA never panned out on Dwilight, with its enormous distances, low population, and tremendous travel times. I am not sure that BM knows what kind of player it wants, but like the Zuma, I wish it would decide already and start catering to at least one group. Players have the luxury of bitching without providing solutions or whining for no reason at all. Developers and GMs do not. You run a service. I suggest you examine why.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 03, 2012, 02:21:03 PM
...yep, people ignore me...

So uh, Dev Team people, some numbers please. How big of an influence does the Zuma actually have on Dwilight? Meaning, how many players are in the western Dwilight continent playing in the following realms: Iashalur, Astrum, Kabrinskia, Asylon, Terran, Barca, Aurvandil, Madina, D'Hara? Of those, how many have ever seen a daimon? I believe we can safely rule out Astrum, Kabrinskia, and Aurvandil as having a daimon in their actual regions. I also believe Iashalur never actually had a daimon in their regions.

Now, let's go to the bigger picture. How many active players play on Dwilight? How many active players play only on Dwilight? How many active players play on continents to the exception of Dwilight (Anywhere but Dwilight)? How many active players total (throughout the game) as of now?

I have a hunch that the percentage of people who would in the least bit be affected by the Zuma (Those realms I listed) are extremely small, and furthermore, the players within those realms who actually care or would in fact be really affected are even smaller still. I really believe that such a small change will hardly affect player count in the total picture of BM as a game that involves way more than the Zuma on Dwilight.

But don't believe me. Let's ask Anaris or someone for the numbers.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 02:26:33 PM
I was in Fissoa and then Luria Nova for a while before moving over to Terran, and you're correct, other than a general sense that 'something was out there' I knew nothing at all about the Zuma except to see 'Zuma Coalition vs. (somebody)' 'Attacker victory.' In Madina, Fissoa, and Luria Nova, things were dull for the usual reason of too many regions, too few players, and too long travel times. The Zuma didn't enter into the equation.

But this is a red herring. In measuring the success of the Zuma, you can't look at 'who aren't they bothering.' If that's the metric then just axe them so that everybody can enjoy this status of 'not being bothered.' The metric should be 'what are they adding that wasn't there before,' at what cost, and is the benefit worth the cost. It's also (and obviously) important to divorce this temperature-taking from the impact on any one character or group of characters; fun in BM comes from gaining and losing status and then gaining it all over again, and the various deals and schemes that are the engines for those changes. I don't even necessarily think that the players themselves have to support the idea, but somebody, somewhere, should have a yard stick for 'positive impact of all this stuff we're doing,' even if that yard stick is just 'is it producing good RP.' From my narrow perspective, that answer is easily no. If there are others to the contrary, that's cool.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 03, 2012, 02:31:30 PM
Well, you see the difficult thing here is the following: On forums, as those who are familiar with forums would know very well, generally only those who have incentive to post would do so, i.e. those with complaints.

This necessarily means that those who have no complaints or are otherwise satisfied, or those who do not know enough, do not post their opinions as often or as strongly.

You will notice in the poll already that 24/54 voters have a positive opinion of the Zuma. 15/54 have a negative opinion, EQUAL to the number of people who are either unsure or ignorant of the Zuma.

Now, you can argue that this is too small of a sample size. However, my response to that is, the representation in actual posts is very, very strongly skewed towards negative opinions. So posts have a disproportionate negative response, while the current poll is still suggesting otherwise. Now, now, let's think about that.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 02:42:39 PM
Of course. It's difficult to translate a poll into terribly useful information, but obviously it's not the case that everybody hates them.

If I'm running the Zuma, though, I want to know the following things:

- Which players am I catering to? Am I trying to attract new players, and if so, what kind? Am I willing to alienate current players in the hopes of changing the atmosphere enough so that we can get moar better new players?
- How can I tell if what I'm doing is having the desired effect? Whose good opinion is most valuable?
- How can I tell if what I'm doing is not working? Whose bad opinion is most valuable?

I don't hate the Zuma at all, either. I don't really get them and I don't see a lot of carrots that make me want to get them, but I'm definitely too small a sample size. I just see a lot of effort going into some production, and it seems to me that there are more efficient ways of spending that much time and energy on content and game events within the realm of a Serious Medieval Atmosphere (if that is even a goal anymore) that would get you a lot more of a reward.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2012, 03:31:10 PM
The extent to which the people involved with the Zuma or with the devs have the attitude of the exasperated babysitter is remarkable. This is typically a sign of a death spiral in any campaign. You're talking to Vellos like he's a child when he's the guy who is most directly concerned with the Zuma as he lives next door. Maybe he doesn't have to like the Zuma, but who, exactly, do you think you are serving? Yourselves? Some nonspecific players who are reveling in all this? What is your mission as GMs and developers, and how do you measure the success of that mission?

I serve Tom.

He put the Zuma on Dwilight for a purpose. I don't know what that purpose is, but until he decides to change or remove them, they're there and they are what they are.

And you would not believe some of the bitchfests we've had in the past. Seriously, this is a calm and reasoned discussion by BattleMaster standards. And the vast majority of the time, it's a vocal minority doing the complaining about a particular feature or event. And the vast majority of the time, the resolution is that said vocal minority finally gives up and just gets on with the game. (Note: not "said vocal minority realizes they were wrong"; that almost never happens. Once people have formed an opinion on a particular topic of this nature, and especially once they've argued it for days on an email list or forum, they're not generally likely to back down and say, "Sorry, no, I was wrong," even if there's no credible evidence to back up their position and mountains of it to back up the other guy's. And yes, I have been on both sides of this  ::) )

(checks Scarlett's player page)

Actually, you've been around long enough that if you ever followed the old discussion list, you might believe the bitchfests ;D

Either way, my point here is that just because you get a long argument/flamewar on a particular topic—even if there are a half-dozen people on the side of "We need to change X about the game"—it doesn't mean that they're right, and it doesn't mean that they're going to get what they want.

Quote
I don't have a pony in this show. I don't care at all about what happens to my Dwilight toon, but this entire thread consists of people registering varying degrees of legitimate complaints and then being told how wrong they are for complaining. I understand how frustrating dealing with players can be, but at some point it seems to me that it doesn't matter if you think they're all morons if what you are doing is not having the desired effect.

First: whether the complaints are legitimate is precisely what is at issue here, so you just coming in and stating it as if it's a decided fact is pretty much begging the question.

Second: when you say "...what you are doing is not having the desired effect," I'm unsure as to whether you mean what the Zuma are doing in-game, or what all our arguing is doing on the forum. However, in the former case, if what the Zuma are doing was not having the desired effect (whatever that happens to be), I'm reasonably sure Tom would tell them to change it or remove them. And in the latter case, as I've already stated, this is an argument on the Internet. It's not going to go anywhere by its very nature. We're not going to convince Vellos and Gustav Kuriga (and the others), and they're not going to convince us, because we're coming at it from completely different premises.

Quote
Two out of every four good players playing within my bm-o-sphere in 2007 and 2008 left when the game terms were being dictated by region maintenance and TMP.

We know about this, and over the past several months, we have been working to make changes that undo the damage to the game that was caused by the old estate system and TMP.  It is a difficult process, however, because everything needs to be carefully balanced, fun, and reasonably historically accurate (pretty much in that order).

Quote
Another one out of four left after SMA never panned out on Dwilight, with its enormous distances, low population, and tremendous travel times.

I'm not sure what would have been required for you to consider SMA to have "panned out." It was never, in any way, shape, or form intended to mean, "Dwilight will be exactly like medieval Europe."

SMA is a guide for how to play your character, nothing more.  True, some people understand it and follow it better than others, but if you find someone to be consistently breaking the serious medieval atmosphere on Dwilight, you are encouraged to report them via the SMA Report link on the Messages page (though, as a warning, it may be moving somewhere else in the not-too-distant future).

Quote
I am not sure that BM knows what kind of player it wants, but like the Zuma, I wish it would decide already and start catering to at least one group.

BattleMaster cannot cater to just one group. If it were to do so, it would cease to be BattleMaster.  Yes, we could probably pull in more people by catering specifically to, say, high-powered strategy players, and abandoning the RP angle altogether—but would that be BattleMaster?  (And frankly, if we were to cater specifically to the roleplay players, we might as well close up BattleMaster and return to its play-by-post roots, because you'll never be able to make game mechanics to fit everybody's favorite roleplay. Not to mention there's nowhere near enough of them to sustain the game.)

Quote
Players have the luxury of bitching without providing solutions or whining for no reason at all. Developers and GMs do not. You run a service. I suggest you examine why.

We run a free game. In our free time. At, in fact, Tom's personal expense.

Yes, you have the luxury of bitching without providing solutions or whining for no reason at all.

And you know what we have?

The luxury of telling you to piss off.

Fortunately for you, we are not exercising that luxury. We are telling you why your arguments are useless, incorrect, or irrelevant. We are engaging with you. We are, in fact, trying very hard to make this game better.

But making the game better does not—cannot—mean bowing to every loudmouthed whiner on the forums. If we were to adopt a policy of doing that, it would lead within months to the utter ruin of the game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 04:17:25 PM
Perhaps you consider that you are responding rationally to an annoying, vocal minority. This is typically the logic used to dismiss forum posters, and it's why I always assumed BM never had forums for so long. But here we are. You don't get a medal for doing this in your spare time. You agreed to do it. If that's such a burden, stop doing it, or at least stop coming here to talk about it if you're going to dismiss anything that comes across in this forum anyway. Most BM players, good or bad, have better things to do than post in the forum -- BM advertises itself as lightweight, after all.  I don't really care if you dismiss what Vellos says or what I say, but you're dismissing the entire platform as beneath you.

If you don't even know what the Zuma's purpose is, what on earth are you doing here talking about it as if you do? If all we're doing is guessing about Tom's intentions, why waste the time? You're defending something you don't even understand and telling off people who apparently don't understand it any better than you do.

Quote
It is a difficult process, however, because everything needs to be carefully balanced, fun, and reasonably historically accurate (pretty much in that order).

That is one of the reasons and the changes I've seen have been spectacular.  The system was only half the problem, though. The attitude was the other half.

Quote
I'm not sure what would have been required for you to consider SMA to have "panned out." It was never, in any way, shape, or form intended to mean, "Dwilight will be exactly like medieval Europe."

I interpreted it literally: that a serious effort would be put forth to build a medieval atmosphere. Instead it's even more fantasy than the other islands and even less medieval because of the low populations and huge travel times. That's a different discussion, though.

Quote
SMA is a guide for how to play your character, nothing more.

The 'A' in 'SMA' presumably is for 'atmosphere,' which I take to mean 'the environment of the game.' There are already guides on how to play your character. I was around when SMA was hatched, as were you, and the discussion was focused on emphasizing the feudal oath and medieval power structures. The code changes have done far more for that than Dwilight has.

For SMA to 'pan out' I would want to go to the dozen or so players with whom I was most involved five years ago and tell them to give BM another look because it's got that medieval sauce that was always a little bit on the thin side. It's not just RPers, though many are. You don't need to write tons of RP to go for the intrigue, the scheming, the medieval politics. The folks who 'got it' were frustrated by the bugs and they were frustrated by the attitude of the people in charge. You are dearly mistaken if you believe that, merely because BM is free, you can tell people to 'piss off' with no consequence.

Quote
BattleMaster cannot cater to just one group.

Obviously not, but it can decide to whom it is catering, whether that is two or nine groups. Every new realm goes through a process that BM needs to go through. New people take over and they kick out or marginalize the people they most associate with the old problems. They then promote and encourage the people they most associate with the kind of realm they want.  You can make the best structure and write the best code for any game like BM out there, but at the end of the day you've got nothing without dedicated players to make your atmosphere. The kind of players who will put in just as much time as you do writing wiki pages, welcoming new players, and arranging the blobs of text that make up BM into something that feels alive and organic rather than a collection of database queries. 

I do recall the bitchfests of yore. The reason I left the d-lists was because of smug, arrogant posts like yours. I put in my time as a titan and a wiki presence and eventually got tired not of the players bitching or the system (which doesn't bother me as much as it bothered some) but of attitudes like yours. Gratitude and accommodation are two way streets. You shrug off input from the handful of big guns BM has left and then you expect them to be grateful that you only suggested rather than outright said that they could piss off. The more time I spend reading posts like yours and reading about the Zuma -- whose summary seems to be 'you have NO IDEA how cool they could be, you are ignorant! oh and so am I, all hail Tom' -- the more I am blown away that the discussion here never got past the kid stuff we had on the d-list.

It sounds like you want a suggestion box, not a discussion forum.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 03, 2012, 04:27:44 PM
How about anyone still with complaints sends an email to Tom privately.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Creed on February 03, 2012, 04:45:50 PM
I personally enjoy the Daimons on Dwilight but I believed they need to be nerfed  some what for example their ability to pretty much fly across the continent so much faster then any of us can move. I think they should be able to move a little bit faster but not to what they can do now.

Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 03, 2012, 05:04:17 PM
I personally enjoy the Daimons on Dwilight but I believed they need to be nerfed  some what for example their ability to pretty much fly across the continent so much faster then any of us can move. I think they should be able to move a little bit faster but not to what they can do now.
So far as I am aware, the daimons on Dwilight have no special travel abilities at all. Nor are they any faster than regular player characters. Any appearance of "flying across the continent" is merely player perception.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2012, 05:04:24 PM
You don't get a medal for doing this in your spare time. You agreed to do it. If that's such a burden, stop doing it, or at least stop coming here to talk about it if you're going to dismiss anything that comes across in this forum anyway.

Let me turn this around on you: You don't get a medal for staying in the game. You chose to join, you choose to stay, and if we tell you, "This part isn't going to change, so why are you still arguing about it?" then it just seems silly to me to continue to argue over it.

Quote
Most BM players, good or bad, have better things to do than post in the forum -- BM advertises itself as lightweight, after all.  I don't really care if you dismiss what Vellos says or what I say, but you're dismissing the entire platform as beneath you.

No, I'm not. The fact that I disagree with what you're saying here and now does not mean that I, and Tom, and the rest of the dev team, do not regularly take suggestions, feedback, and complaints from the forum to heart.

This is a dangerous kind of trap to fall into, that I have taken to calling "the mayonnaise problem." I'm sure it has a proper logical name, something similar to "confirmation bias."

My wife gets mad at me when I leave the mayonnaise out on the counter after making a sandwich to bring for my lunch. She says, "You always leave the mayonnaise out!" But the problem is, when I don't leave the mayonnaise out, she doesn't even know I've made a sandwich. So even though I only leave the mayonnaise out, say, once out of every ten times, she thinks I leave it out every time.

In this case, you see that I'm dismissing this particular argument (and several from the D-list of old) as a vocal minority, and because this argument means something to you and you believe I'm wrong to dismiss it, that leads you to believe that I dismiss good arguments with the bad. But that's a fallacy, because it just means that in this case, you happen to be part of the minority.

Is a vocal minority always wrong? No. We have taken their suggestions and complaints sometimes, too.

But neither does the fact that you are part of this one mean that it's right.

Quote
If you don't even know what the Zuma's purpose is, what on earth are you doing here talking about it as if you do?

I challenge you to find anywhere in this thread (or any other) where I have even suggested that I know what the Zuma's purpose is.  So far as I know, only Tom and the Zuma GM really know what the purpose of the Zuma is.

I don't pretend to know what it is, I just know that Tom put them there for a reason, and until he decides to change that, I don't see them being a serious problem.  Their presence is causing a ruckus, yes. But 99% of that, now, is not because of anything they are doing, saying, or attempting to do. It is because people like Vellos and Gustav Kuriga are fanning the flames of anger against them deliberately. You've seen Vellos admit outright that he's now deliberately provoking the Zuma just to get them to cause more trouble.

Quote
I interpreted it literally: that a serious effort would be put forth to build a medieval atmosphere. Instead it's even more fantasy than the other islands and even less medieval because of the low populations and huge travel times. That's a different discussion, though.

That's an understandable, but mistaken interpretation.

All SMA was ever intended to mean was "Your characters need to act as though they are actually medieval nobles, not 12-65 year old Internet users sitting at computers in the early 21st century." It was never intended to indicate anything about the environment they would be put in—just how they were required to react to that environment.

Quote
For SMA to 'pan out' I would want to go to the dozen or so players with whom I was most involved five years ago and tell them to give BM another look because it's got that medieval sauce that was always a little bit on the thin side. It's not just RPers, though many are. You don't need to write tons of RP to go for the intrigue, the scheming, the medieval politics. The folks who 'got it' were frustrated by the bugs and they were frustrated by the attitude of the people in charge. You are dearly mistaken if you believe that, merely because BM is free, you can tell people to 'piss off' with no consequence.

And I don't believe that. Nor have I ever told someone to piss off who hadn't degenerated into purely ad hominem-type idiocy in their arguments.

But you are dearly mistaken if you believe that, merely because you play BM, you get to dictate anything about the direction of the game's development. You get to make suggestions, criticisms, and yes, complaints and whines. But we have the right to ignore you completely if we believe that is what is best for the game as a whole.

Quote
Obviously not, but it can decide to whom it is catering, whether that is two or nine groups. Every new realm goes through a process that BM needs to go through. New people take over and they kick out or marginalize the people they most associate with the old problems. They then promote and encourage the people they most associate with the kind of realm they want. 

And this is an ongoing process.  The people BattleMaster wanted to appeal to in 2004 is a quite different group than who it wants to appeal to in 2012.  Part of BattleMaster's problem has always been that it's a pretty unique kind of game: it doesn't have the kinds of fancy graphics some games have, it doesn't permit the sort of micromanagement of people's real lives required for super-efficient armies, it doesn't permit you to create 100 accounts to boost your realm like some games do...

We are doing our best, and (and this is the important part) we do not expect every part of BattleMaster to please all of its players. There are six different continents for a reason. And Dwilight is big enough to be two continents all by itself. So there's plenty of room for pretty much every type of player that BattleMaster attracts.

Quote
You can make the best structure and write the best code for any game like BM out there, but at the end of the day you've got nothing without dedicated players to make your atmosphere. The kind of players who will put in just as much time as you do writing wiki pages, welcoming new players, and arranging the blobs of text that make up BM into something that feels alive and organic rather than a collection of database queries. 

This is absolutely true, and we are well aware of this, and trying to focus on pleasing our players with the changes we have been making, like the removal of TMP and the simplified food system.

Quote
I do recall the bitchfests of yore. The reason I left the d-lists was because of smug, arrogant posts like yours. I put in my time as a titan and a wiki presence and eventually got tired not of the players bitching or the system (which doesn't bother me as much as it bothered some) but of attitudes like yours. Gratitude and accommodation are two way streets. You shrug off input from the handful of big guns BM has left and then you expect them to be grateful that you only suggested rather than outright said that they could piss off. The more time I spend reading posts like yours and reading about the Zuma -- whose summary seems to be 'you have NO IDEA how cool they could be, you are ignorant! oh and so am I, all hail Tom' -- the more I am blown away that the discussion here never got past the kid stuff we had on the d-list.

It sounds like you want a suggestion box, not a discussion forum.

Again, I refer you to the mayonnaise fallacy. You come on here and see me responding in the way that I do in these last few posts (and while I can at least understand where "arrogant" might be coming from, since I am, indeed, speaking from a position of power, I'm really not sure about "smug"...perhaps you're reading my occasional flippancy and humor as smugness?), and you assume that I view all player input with smug, arrogant, contempt.

This could not be farther from the truth.

The truth is that I am a bit jaded, due to the number of players who have come on the forum or the D-list whining about this or that when the consequences were obvious, or demanding that their pet feature be implemented when there is no way it would work well, or moaning about a Titan decision that was obviously correct, or bitching about how another realm is owning theirs, and something has to be done to stop this. It gets frustrating and aggravating, and some days, yes, I'm too harsh on people and I say things that might not be the most diplomatic.

But I have also seen some fantastic ideas come from the players. And, well, I'm a player myself. ("I'm not just the president, I'm also a client!") I see many of the things that go wrong in the game—and I also see how much of it goes right. I can't be everywhere, of course, but I do have four active characters, one each on EC, BT, FEI, and Dwilight. 

I want to know what people think about the game. I want to know what people love about the game. I want to know what people hate about the game.

What I don't want, Scarlett, is for people who have been all but told flat out, "What you have been asking for is not going to happen," to continue to ask for it.

The Zuma are not going to be removed. They are not going to have their CS nerfed. They are not going to be turned into a purely RP group. It is not going to be made possible to turn one against another.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 03, 2012, 05:04:56 PM
I personally enjoy the Daimons on Dwilight but I believed they need to be nerfed  some what for example their ability to pretty much fly across the continent so much faster then any of us can move. I think they should be able to move a little bit faster but not to what they can do now.

I don't know where you got the idea that they can do this, but it's completely untrue.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 03, 2012, 06:05:34 PM
I haven't once asked for them to be removed. I've given you my impression as someone who just came into this situation a couple months ago. You chose to disregard it. That's your prerogative.

It would have been nice if you'd spent half as much time talking about the Zuma or responding to the criticisms -- rather than dismissing them -- as you have talking about talking about the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 03, 2012, 06:09:53 PM
I wonder why Tom has not decided to just come in and declare something here.

Here's a little something not many of you know: For the past 1.5 years I have also tried to get Tom to do stuff about the Zuma. Like, possibly making them more interesting for people, possibly changing a few things like how they're portrayed so people get a better idea of them, stuff like that, most of the time. He does respond.

But the thing about this is: Do it yourself. Keep posting on the forums if you must, but the thing that has a small chance of working is sending Tom a private message explaining the following:

1. What you think is wrong.
2. Why you think it deserves to be changed.
3. What changes you propose.

There, easy enough. That at least might have a chance of getting you somewhere. Continuing to post now is probably going to fulfill only one goal: Increase your post count. And if I recall correctly, people often say that such a practice is my specialty. Hm, wonder if this means I'll have competition? LOL
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Scarlett on February 04, 2012, 12:11:30 AM
So this entire business has been nothing but chest-thumping from involved-but-dismissed parties and uninvolved parties?

I think I preferred when BM didn't have forums. I don't think I'll be back.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2012, 01:50:20 AM
Second: when you say "...what you are doing is not having the desired effect," I'm unsure as to whether you mean what the Zuma are doing in-game, or what all our arguing is doing on the forum. However, in the former case, if what the Zuma are doing was not having the desired effect (whatever that happens to be), I'm reasonably sure Tom would tell them to change it or remove them. And in the latter case, as I've already stated, this is an argument on the Internet. It's not going to go anywhere by its very nature. We're not going to convince Vellos and Gustav Kuriga (and the others), and they're not going to convince us, because we're coming at it from completely different premises.

I could be convinced. I just think you have yet to produce a meaningful counterargument. I have admitted I was wrong on numerous occasions, even after long arguments: just recently, the case I opened against the Zuma GM regarding torture comes to mind, or the vulgarity feature. C'mon Tim, you know me well enough to know that I don't just pick an opinion, then plug my fingers in my ears and go "I'm not listening!"


We know about this, and over the past several months, we have been working to make changes that undo the damage to the game that was caused by the old estate system and TMP.  It is a difficult process, however, because everything needs to be carefully balanced, fun, and reasonably historically accurate (pretty much in that order).

This is actually a great example.

There were some serious bitchfests over TMP (and estates). Many players left. Some who liked them stayed (like myself). We said to ourselves, "We're right, we're right, the complainers are just whining because they're losing..."

But you know what? Those of us who favored old estates and TMP were wrong. And you know what? When that was admitted, and when work began to actually address those issues... lo and behold, things are getting better.

Surprise! If you listen to the complaints being voiced by a significant group of players, and adapt, you can create a better game! Woah!



And you know what we have?

The luxury of telling you to piss off.

Fortunately for you, we are not exercising that luxury. We are telling you why your arguments are useless, incorrect, or irrelevant. We are engaging with you. We are, in fact, trying very hard to make this game better.

No. Your argument has been, "That's not how the Zuma were designed to be, so we shouldn't change them." Your argument has been that the Zuma should not be changed because they were not designed to be changed. It has also been argued that those frustrated with the Zuma are just playing wrong, or not thinking about the issues enough. When we have stated various strategies we have attempted, we have been ignored.

It is not true that leaving the Zuma alone means you will get left alone. It's not true. As in, "It is false." If you seriously think that's an option... then you're ignorant. Because someone out there somewhere will find a way to provoke the Zuma. It gives one or two players the power to control the destiny of dozens, based on the strength of a GM faction.

First, Tim, I'm unsure if you're right about not being able to turn a GM faction against itself. Things I've seen from other people more involved with the Zuma than you, both IC and OOC, indicate they are not so unified as you claim.

Second, even if you are right, that's irrelevant. I'm not arguing about what strategies are possible but about what strategies should be possible.

But making the game better does not—cannot—mean bowing to every loudmouthed whiner on the forums. If we were to adopt a policy of doing that, it would lead within months to the utter ruin of the game.

You're absolutely right. We shouldn't bow to every loudmouthed whiner on the forums. I do hope you're not characterizing me personally as a "loudmouthed whiner." Again, you know me well enough to know that I practically get glee from being on the losing side of things and watching my schemes be evicerated by other players, be it in Oligarch, Irombrozia, MR, Riombara, or elsewhere we've played in proximity to each other.

But because you don't want to bow to every loudmouthed whiner doesn't mean you should write off complaints every time their loud or insistent. You may be right that our arguments as we have stated them are insufficient (I don't think you are, but it's possible). But even if you are right: there's still something seriously wrong that's causing all these players to be unhappy. The vibe I'm getting from you (and from the Zuma GM IG) is that you think the thing that is wrong is basically me, which perplexes me, as I was not the first person to be bothered by the Zuma. I began this whole thing because of complaints from members of Terran. I have continued because I have grown more frustrated with the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2012, 01:58:09 AM
You've seen Vellos admit outright that he's now deliberately provoking the Zuma just to get them to cause more trouble.

And I answered my own question as I read further....

And that is total bull!@#$. That is a malicious lie that you have posted because you're frustrated that you can't find a rational argument to counter the anger of players around the Zuma.

I said that Hireshmont is provoking the Zuma, and, even then, it's not even quite true (though the Zuma GM has practically quoted some of my forum messages IG, which is a bit upsetting). I'm not getting the Zuma to try and cause trouble. Hireshmont wants them to go back to being quiet. In several posts, I have noted Terran's current strategy, which is to try and move the Zuma back into their previous isolation. It is a strategy arrived at practically unanimously through IC discussion in Terran. To so mischaracterize what I have said as me the player trying to provoke the Zuma to "get them to cause trouble" is not only a false representation of what my character is doing, but a shameful conflation of IC and OOC motivations.

I am extremely disappointed that you actually decided to take this so personally as to decide that somehow I am the problem player. I want to ignore the Zuma. But it isn't possible. If we ignore them, they will kill us eventually. You cannot put thousands of CS on your borders then just say, "Pretend we're not there." You cannot wander through and kill hundreds of soldiers then say, "Just ignore us." You cannot send an army to a city when only an ambassador was invited, and then say, "We're not here to engage in intimidation." The Zuma's actions are broadly comprehensible to me if and only if I assume that their objective is the subjugation or vassalization of neighboring states. Their behaviors do not make sense under any other hypothesis I have yet seen. I'm not saying there isn't another possibility, just that I haven't seen it.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on February 04, 2012, 08:17:30 AM
That's actually a poor direction to turn your argument in. If the Zuma's purpose was to subjugate their neighbors they could do so easily. I also would be greatly surprised if they destroyed Terran without first being excessively provoked to do so. I'd guess that you'd have to basically force them to destroy you through either willful obstinance or extreme stupidity. It's obvious that conquest and/or hegemony isn't their purpose, simply because if it was they could have already conquered the entire Maroccidens a long time ago. However, that it clearly isn't their purpose makes their recent militarism all the more incomprehensible to me since it only overshadows all the other types of interaction that they engage in and creates fear and prejudice against them. You yourself are an excellent example of how the excessive resort to threats and force recently by the Zuma have poisoned the game environment that they are supposed to be enriching. The Zuma are a plot device. As such they should be generating interest and intrigue. Instead they seem to be engendering ill will and frustration. That says to me that there is a flaw in the way they have been implemented.

They might be better without the overwhelming military. You could always give them some other abilities that they can use to protect themselves. The army they have is really at the heart of the problem here; by its very existence it encourages the behavior we've seen. When you can act with impunity, the temptation is to do so. And hence we have seen the Zuma act repeatedly of late, often based on the smallest of reasons. This behavior is amplified by the fact that from a rational standpoint, it makes sense to use power when you have it, but I wonder whether some of what we've seen recently isn't a bit of a stretch, almost an excuse to use the power. Thus I question whether the power should be taken away and replaced with something more subtle that can serve the same purpose. The Zuma are not supposed to be conquerors or they'd have conquered already. Therefore what do they need an army for? Defense? Ok, I accept that they need to be able to defend themselves. So why don't you design some other way for them to deter invasion? Make them mighty sorcerers or something. Give them the ability to burn trespassing armies to the ground, but limit what they can do outside of their own territory. The Zuma army is showing signs of becoming an end unto itself. It's there, so therefore it must be used. I think that's what's really generating this frustration at the moment.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 04, 2012, 11:28:12 AM
Make them "Light" dudes, or I guess in this case..."Darkness" dudes...They can shoot out beams of...er...darkness...that destroys all human forces in a region like the Light worked on inhuman forces, humans can't enter regions with a "Temple of Darkness" which would be in Zuma regions (Thereby preventing most interactions), and any human TLs in a region blasted by darkness would get an auto-critically wounded effect lasting...a long time. lololol

By the way: Totally serious here. The temples would be situated in three key regions, like Nightmarch, Dragon Song, and Ruins of Walfurgisnacht. This would probably be enough to reach all regions in the Zuma, thus frying any humans who are dumb enough to invade. As well, because the temples are immobile, that means the Zuma can't go out to fry people, and can only be strictly defensive. This would get rid of complaints about how they are out to conquer !@#$ because they seriously can't.

As well, this would make people who try to forge letters to instigate an attack fail, because the Zuma can't do anything about it anyway, and the guys who are the target certainly won't go into the Zuma lands, unless they really have a deathwish. And if they do, then it really is solely their fault and their stupidity.

Also I'm aware of generally how the Light works. Anaris can provide further insight, and yes, it requires a religion, elder priests, etc etc. Little modification here or there...It doesn't look like it'd be too big of a mod, since the "darkness" temples could even be reduced in its options (You can't sacrifice...wait, nevermind. Zuma...humans...sacrifice. Right, that can be kept in lol)

Unfortunately, this won't work either. It'll be perceived as unjustified for a small gain. I'm just trying to show that I'm not adamantly opposed to change. I also think about some improvements, but by now I've accepted that my ideas are generally crappy and won't be listened to.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on February 04, 2012, 12:21:49 PM
And that is total bull!@#$. That is a malicious lie.

I said that Hireshmont is provoking the Zuma,
You're saying that it's 'total' because it's not Vellos, but the character that Vellos plays that's doing the provoking? That's a rather weak argument.

Quote
and, even then, it's not even quite true (though the Zuma GM has practically quoted some of my forum messages IG, which is a bit upsetting).

Either make a Magistrate care of that or stop posting Zuma related stuff.

Quote
Their behaviors do not make sense under any other hypothesis I have yet seen. I'm not saying there isn't another possibility, just that I haven't seen it.

Think of the Zuma like a present. It's wrapped, you don't know what's inside of it. It's a big box, say 3 feet, by 2 inches by 6 feet (1mx6MMx2m for our metric players). The box is standing up on its edge. You bump into the box, it falls over an smashes your toes. It hurts. You set the present back up next to the wall. Someone else knocks the present over, and it smashes your toes again.

Do you really want to throw away the present without unwrapping it, because it smashed your toes a couple of times? We have no idea what the Zuma are really here for. It could be Tom's most amazing idea ever, and you want to throw it away without even find out what it is?

You're really willing to take that gamble, just to maintain your ridiculous gold income status quo? You know that those peasants and soldiers are just 1's and 0's inside of a server ,right, and you, Vellos, shouldn't actually care about them beyond the fact that they provide us players with some entertainment.

Just play Hireshmont in an SMA fashion, according to whatever you think a medieval noble would do when confronted with an enemy like the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on February 04, 2012, 01:09:25 PM
What is incredibly frustrating and disappointing is that a fair amount of the things that are being complained about on this forum are things that could easily have been dealt with in character within the game.
Has anyone mentioned the concerns of the army sizes in game? No. How do you know what response you would get? You don't, you just make assumptions on what anything and everything is there for.
The issue with Asylon, the treaty, the two regions - in game they have been told exactly what happened with regard to that treaty (and, as it's been stated on this forum that the Zuma just chose to ignore it I will clarify that is not the case and there is good reason for why they did what they did, as has been explained in game to more than one person.) Asylon also know, in game, what they need to do to have those regions back, so I am confused by some of Glaumring's comments.
Also, as I've now covered it a number of times within the game that enough people should be aware of it, with regard to the forged letter - the Zuma had never experienced such a thing before. They did not know that humans did such a thing. the culture of humans they have been used to (their Zuma) do not do that sort of thing. The Daimons are aware of it now, and would not fall for such a thing again (as has been demonstrated by the fact they haven't acted on other information they have been given - though obviously the players don't see this because nothing happens).
I have an account on the forums here (which I try not to have to use very often) and I am on Dwilight. If people have sensible, constructive ideas or other things to say, you can just send me a message you know.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2012, 01:48:16 PM
Has anyone mentioned the concerns of the army sizes in game? No. How do you know what response you would get? You don't, you just make assumptions on what anything and everything is there for.

Are you seriously suggesting that my character goes into the lands of the daimons and then flat out state "I think your army is too big. That's not fair.", and that that would elicit a response? That is pretty much the definition of non-SMA behaviour. It is as far from SMA as can be possibly imagined.

You realize we should be treating you as a daimonic force, right?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 04, 2012, 04:23:31 PM
One of the dangers of hating me as a player is that you miss out on some things. One of the dangers of having your characters be too proud to swallow that pride and deal with Garret despite his sometimes abrasive language (And believe me, it's YOU, not me. There are those Garret gets along with perfectly well because those players' characters were constructed to be pretty level-headed.) is failing to understand what actual use he has to you.

Perhaps I can make it a little clearer because the way I see it, Terran is really tailspinning into a really deep hole as it is.

Here's the deal: If you want to talk to the daimons, then yes, you do have to see them in their regions. Want to know the one, sole, single known way to get the daimons' attention otherwise? It's not that hard. Whether you choose to do it is your problem. Whether you choose to trust the method is your problem, though you might be reminded that the daimons can always verify that their method is being reliable. They...have ways.

Most importantly, it's your neck on the line if you go into a Zuma region and complain about their army size to a daimon. It's not your neck on the line if you don't enter their region and you choose to transmit the complaint. But hey, I'm not implying anything.

...I still think the Temples of Darkness idea would work...
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on February 04, 2012, 05:19:47 PM
Are you seriously suggesting that my character goes into the lands of the daimons and then flat out state "I think your army is too big. That's not fair.", and that that would elicit a response? That is pretty much the definition of non-SMA behaviour. It is as far from SMA as can be possibly imagined.

You realize we should be treating you as a daimonic force, right?

You could send an ambassador, explain that humans normally keep armies of sufficient size to control their own borders, and state that the army the size of the Zuma makes you very nervous, and inquire as to why the Zuma keep such large standing armies.

You know, like a real ambassador, not like a 12-year-old.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2012, 06:15:39 PM
You could send an ambassador, explain that humans normally keep armies of sufficient size to control their own borders, and state that the army the size of the Zuma makes you very nervous, and inquire as to why the Zuma keep such large standing armies.

You know, like a real ambassador, not like a 12-year-old.

Have you met Screamer? I have. My gut reaction was not to ask "My, what big teeth you have!". I know too well what would be coming. All the daimons' RP that I have seen is meant to make my character feel like a 12 year-old.

Maybe you have seen different RP than I have. That's very possible and all the best for you then. However, from what I have seen, asking questions like what you propose would be non-SMA. It wouldn't be madness: my character is a priest, they can't do anything if I don't preach, so I as a player know that my character is safe. But my character doesn't.

That's what SMA is about.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2012, 07:33:18 PM
Have you met Screamer? I have. My gut reaction was not to ask "My, what big teeth you have!". I know too well what would be coming. All the daimons' RP that I have seen is meant to make my character feel like a 12 year-old.

Maybe you need to realize that there's more to the Daimons than just Screamer.  That they have individual personality and physical traits that distinguish them.  And that acting like a 12-year-old is one of the best ways to get treated like a 12-year-old.

(Disclaimer: I have no idea how your characters have acted around the Zuma, nor how they have been treated.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on February 04, 2012, 08:00:13 PM
Have you met Screamer? I have. My gut reaction was not to ask "My, what big teeth you have!". I know too well what would be coming. All the daimons' RP that I have seen is meant to make my character feel like a 12 year-old.

Maybe you have seen different RP than I have. That's very possible and all the best for you then. However, from what I have seen, asking questions like what you propose would be non-SMA. It wouldn't be madness: my character is a priest, they can't do anything if I don't preach, so I as a player know that my character is safe. But my character doesn't.

That's what SMA is about.

Really? I think that curiosity is not a recent human invention. You could start the conversation by saying, "my religious texts do not mention daimons. What are you, and where do you come from?" Then, you can ask, "Why are you here, and why do you have such large armies?"

I don't think that would be against SMA--just a priest trying to fill in some gaps in his religion.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 04, 2012, 08:05:32 PM
He's in SA. Er...Dunno what that means though.

SMA doesn't mean some guy can't be crazy enough to try talking to a daimon (It happens all the time, perplexingly enough). It just means that in the actual presence of a daimon, your character is probably having trouble maintaining tension in his sphincters.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2012, 08:12:06 PM
Really? I think that curiosity is not a recent human invention. You could start the conversation by saying, "my religious texts do not mention daimons. What are you, and where do you come from?" Then, you can ask, "Why are you here, and why do you have such large armies?"

I don't think that would be against SMA--just a priest trying to fill in some gaps in his religion.

OK, apparently we did not receive the same RP. The one I had mentioned, quite specifically, that I couldn't approach the origin of the scream as my ears were close to bleeding. Maybe I should go back, maybe they have changed since then.

Maybe they're not daimons anymore.

Or maybe I should have just ignored that RP and went on my way? Yeah, that's very SMA.

My own disclaimer: maybe others have had completely different experiences. That's fine with me, the Zuma are not obligated to treat everyone equally.

The fact remains that I want to react according to the way my character perceives the Zuma. If I'm OOC worried by something, I will certainly not just go into the Netherworld lands and just ask them. That's putting a extremely thin layer of IC coating around a OOC question. That's not wrong per se, but it's not how the game is intended to be played.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2012, 08:32:03 PM
Has anyone mentioned the concerns of the army sizes in game? No. How do you know what response you would get? You don't, you just make assumptions on what anything and everything is there for.

SMA doesn't mean some guy can't be crazy enough to try talking to a daimon (It happens all the time, perplexingly enough). It just means that in the actual presence of a daimon, your character is probably having trouble maintaining tension in his sphincters.

Ok, maybe I'll try to express myself differently. I certainly don't mean to imply that anybody who talks to the daimons is wrong. Talking to the daimon, in an SMA manner, is certainly possible in some circumstances and I'm certain others have done it.

I don't think it's fair, however, to just come in and say "If you're worried about the Zuma army, why not ask me about it in game?" People are worried because it is controlled by a NPC character, because it is led by "daimons", and because they feel that it is an insurmountable force.

Note that I'm not too worried personally. My character and realms are safe. However, I as a player worry when other players complain that they are having less fun than they could.

Sure, people can go to the daimons and ask them about the size of their armies. They could also go to Eidulb and ask Brance why he keeps such a strong army. The difference is that Brance is human, and Brance is a PC. That's playing the game. I also don't think Brance would entertain them for very long (but who knows). Brance certainly wouldn't squash them like insects, however.

I have a real hard time to imagine why my character would go to the daimons and do that. Furthermore, it's not my character that wants to know "why" daimons keep a big army. My character notices the big army and he is afraid. If my character had such a war machine at his disposal and somebody asked him "why", can you imagine what he would do? He would crush the person who asked the question.

Of course, I'm sure the Zuma won't do that, because ZumaGM is aware that he is over-powered and that crushing people who ask such question is not his role on Dwilight. And I'm glad for that - if the Zuma crushed everybody who interacted with them, Dwilight would be a boring place. But that's not SMA.
Our characters are not supposed to know that ZumaGM is benevolent and wants to make Dwilight a fun place. Our characters see daimons.

Anyway, I'll stop here. I feel like I'm ranting and I don't want to.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2012, 08:56:54 PM
Ok, one last comment.

When I see "Has anyone mentioned the concerns of the army sizes in game? No. How do you know what response you would get? You don't, you just make assumptions", what this means to me is "You're not good enough to beat the game. Work harder."

But Battlemaster is not a game you can win. It is a PvP environment.

When I hear Garrett say the same thing, it doesn't bother me because I know he is a player. He may well beat me at BM. That's fine. When the game says that, though, it does bother me.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2012, 09:29:51 PM
OK, apparently we did not receive the same RP. The one I had mentioned, quite specifically, that I couldn't approach the origin of the scream as my ears were close to bleeding. Maybe I should go back, maybe they have changed since then.

No, Screamer hasn't changed. But Screamer isn't the only Daimon.

Don't try to talk to Screamer. And don't expect a useful answer out of Silence.

The names mean something. Pay attention to them.

And absolutely, 100% do not assume that the type of interaction you can have with one Daimon is the type of interaction you can have with all Daimons.

Go find another Daimon—Haktoo would be a good one to try!—and just talk to them.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Velax on February 04, 2012, 09:32:32 PM
Well, Silence obviously has some means of communication, as he (she?) is the one I sent the FORGED LETTER to.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2012, 09:39:08 PM
Well, Silence obviously has some means of communication, as he (she?) is the one I sent the FORGED LETTER to.

It seems to me that letters are all you're likely to be able to get out of (or into) Silence.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 04, 2012, 09:52:11 PM
Don't try to talk to Screamer. And don't expect a useful answer out of Silence.

The names mean something. Pay attention to them.

And absolutely, 100% do not assume that the type of interaction you can have with one Daimon is the type of interaction you can have with all Daimons.

Go find another Daimon—Haktoo would be a good one to try!—and just talk to them.

You think it would be SMA behaviour for a character who has met Screamer to purposefully seek out interaction with other daimons?

Seriously?

You're not just saying that for the sake of contradicting others?

Again, I understand that not everyone's first interaction was with Screamer - that's fine.

But, seriously?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: songqu88@gmail.com on February 04, 2012, 10:03:53 PM
Heh, if Screamer was your first, then I'm sorry, my good sir, but your character, I suppose, is screwed. If you believe that SMA would mean your current character would not talk to another daimon due to the experience with Screamer, then all the more power to you. I admire your adherence to the strict guidelines you follow with that character.

Perhaps in the future, if you find yourself with a different character on Dwilight, your fortunes may change?

(PS: Garret doesn't win against anyone. And I figured out a good analogy for his role.

Here's a hypothetical situation: You're a poor person ignorant of the law. You get assigned a public defender. That lawyer appointed for you is like Garret. And the law I guess would be the daimons. Now, you might not like your lawyer, or want him. And guess what? Your lawyer probably doesn't like you either because you're poor and a nobody, and above all, he's not getting thanked for helping you, or getting his name out so he can handle bigger cases.

But despite all that, your lawyer actually knows the law, however little it may be, which is still a lot more than you, the stupid, idiotic, pauper. And he's more likely to get you a good deal with the prosecution than you would be able to alone.

And you know the ironic part? What I just illustrated is very, very close to what Garret is to characters like Glaumring and Hireshmont. (Minus the poor nameless part, since I guess they're rich and famous, but still just as ignorant when it comes to the daimons/analogue of the law in my analogy.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2012, 10:53:46 PM
You think it would be SMA behaviour for a character who has met Screamer to purposefully seek out interaction with other daimons?

I think you might be confusing "SMA" with "don't think too hard, stereotype like mad, and abandon all curiosity."

If it is in your character's nature to assume that all other Daimons will be like Screamer, then by all means, abandon all possibility of finding out anything more about the Zuma IC (but don't complain to us OOC about it).

If, on the other hand, your character has a shred of curiosity or critical thinking in him, he might just say, "Hm. Well, that Daimon was very dangerous to approach. I thought I'd heard about people getting actual information out of the Daimons, though? How could they do that if their brains were bleeding out their ears? Maybe there are Daimons who don't do that...?"
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 04, 2012, 10:58:23 PM
I think you might be confusing "SMA" with "don't think too hard, stereotype like mad, and abandon all curiosity."

If it is in your character's nature to assume that all other Daimons will be like Screamer, then by all means, abandon all possibility of finding out anything more about the Zuma IC (but don't complain to us OOC about it).

If, on the other hand, your character has a shred of curiosity or critical thinking in him, he might just say, "Hm. Well, that Daimon was very dangerous to approach. I thought I'd heard about people getting actual information out of the Daimons, though? How could they do that if their brains were bleeding out their ears? Maybe there are Daimons who don't do that...?"

Might we try not attacking the other players characters OOC?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 04, 2012, 11:12:28 PM
Might we try not attacking the other players characters OOC?

Such was not at all my intention. I have great respect for von Genf's player.

I was giving him suggestions for how he might proceed, and a clarification of SMA—couched in the same level of sarcasm his post that I replied to was written with.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2012, 11:13:01 PM
Make them "Light" dudes, or I guess in this case..."Darkness" dudes...They can shoot out beams of...er...darkness...that destroys all human forces in a region like the Light worked on inhuman forces, humans can't enter regions with a "Temple of Darkness" which would be in Zuma regions (Thereby preventing most interactions), and any human TLs in a region blasted by darkness would get an auto-critically wounded effect lasting...a long time. lololol

By the way: Totally serious here. The temples would be situated in three key regions, like Nightmarch, Dragon Song, and Ruins of Walfurgisnacht. This would probably be enough to reach all regions in the Zuma, thus frying any humans who are dumb enough to invade. As well, because the temples are immobile, that means the Zuma can't go out to fry people, and can only be strictly defensive. This would get rid of complaints about how they are out to conquer !@#$ because they seriously can't.

As well, this would make people who try to forge letters to instigate an attack fail, because the Zuma can't do anything about it anyway, and the guys who are the target certainly won't go into the Zuma lands, unless they really have a deathwish. And if they do, then it really is solely their fault and their stupidity.

Also I'm aware of generally how the Light works. Anaris can provide further insight, and yes, it requires a religion, elder priests, etc etc. Little modification here or there...It doesn't look like it'd be too big of a mod, since the "darkness" temples could even be reduced in its options (You can't sacrifice...wait, nevermind. Zuma...humans...sacrifice. Right, that can be kept in lol)

Unfortunately, this won't work either. It'll be perceived as unjustified for a small gain. I'm just trying to show that I'm not adamantly opposed to change. I also think about some improvements, but by now I've accepted that my ideas are generally crappy and won't be listened to.

Actually... this would be okay with me. Artemesia just had a not terrible idea expressed in largely reasonable terms. Woah.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 04, 2012, 11:19:02 PM
Well, Silence obviously has some means of communication, as he (she?) is the one I sent the FORGED LETTER to.

Indeed.

I'm discovering that at least one daimon speaks in rhyme. All the time. Which though annoying, and makes me think the GM is toying. But, at least we can have some conversations, which removes some serious complications.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 04, 2012, 11:30:18 PM
Im hardly rich, look at my family wealth and then my tax :( , and im not famous either, infamous maybe . I'm just a regular king , im lukewarm king version 1.0
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: JPierreD on February 05, 2012, 01:41:00 AM
Indeed.

I'm discovering that at least one daimon speaks in rhyme. All the time. Which though annoying, and makes me think the GM is toying. But, at least we can have some conversations, which removes some serious complications.

I have seen those messages, and just joined the RP. Honestly, it makes me think the GM is taking extra effort in playing his characters.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on February 05, 2012, 03:49:02 AM
Might we try not attacking the other players characters OOC?

I didn't read that as an attack. Try re-reading it without a presumption of guilt.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 05, 2012, 04:08:52 AM
When I see "Has anyone mentioned the concerns of the army sizes in game? No. How do you know what response you would get? You don't, you just make assumptions", what this means to me is "You're not good enough to beat the game. Work harder."
My interpretation of this is that he's saying "As a player, don't make assumptions about what the characters will do. You can't know what the characters will do unless you go find out." Now, you may not want to find out. Your character may make any assumption you want them to make.

But people shouldn't come to the forum and say "Why should I go ask them? They won't tell me anyway."  That's an OOC assumption. Or, at least, that statement says that the poster has made an OOC assumption about what will happen if their characters were to go do something. If my character were concerned about the massive armies that the Zuma have (and Brance doesn't really know or care, the Zuma are too far away for him to worry), he just might go ask them why they feel the need to have such a huge army. After all, if your neighbor claims he wants to be your friend, or just wants to be left alone, yet maintains a unreasonably huge army, wouldn't you want to know why? So, why not ask? What's the worst he's likely to do, tell you it's none of your business, and you should GTFO of his land? And if he does start a war, then... hey... war! Woohoo! We need more of them anyway.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Chenier on February 05, 2012, 06:06:00 AM
Heh..haha...you're...you're joking, right? Like, OOCly, you are in fact, joking, yes?

I'd say the same thing.

Unless you were going out of your way to poke them with a stick, they were overall quite civilized. Merciless, sure, but otherwise quite handy allies who regularly showed compassion for our suffering.

As for the Zuma, Vates was a bit freeky, but definately looked like quite a nice guy. He was the first daimon *I* met, same for many others. Seemed like a good chap with whom we could build a strong friendship.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on February 05, 2012, 06:40:36 AM
I think you might be confusing "SMA" with "don't think too hard, stereotype like mad, and abandon all curiosity."

If it is in your character's nature to assume that all other Daimons will be like Screamer, then by all means, abandon all possibility of finding out anything more about the Zuma IC (but don't complain to us OOC about it).

If, on the other hand, your character has a shred of curiosity or critical thinking in him, he might just say, "Hm. Well, that Daimon was very dangerous to approach. I thought I'd heard about people getting actual information out of the Daimons, though? How could they do that if their brains were bleeding out their ears? Maybe there are Daimons who don't do that...?"

This is a question of style. Personally, I see Von Genf's point. If your character's only encounter with the daimons was with an inhuman horror like Screamer, why on earth would you ever try to deal with them again? Why wouldn't you simply try to get as far away from them as possible? Sure, as a PLAYER you can know that there's probably more to them. But if you take your character seriously as a superstitious medieval noble, SMA style, why wouldn't you be terrified given that RP? Continuing to try to interact with them after such an encounter is borderline *insane* from the roleplaying standpoint.

Ans seriously, why would anyone bother to *ask* another realm why they have such a big army? Isn't the answer self-evident? It's there. You know what that means. Enough said. When have armies ever been a subject of diplomatic debate other than in the context of surrender talks?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Bjarnson on February 05, 2012, 08:08:04 AM
Im hardly rich, look at my family wealth and then my tax :( , and im not famous either, infamous maybe . I'm just a regular king , im lukewarm king version 1.0

I disagree, atelast on the last part. For i know nothing about your family taxes...

ps. I still think the Daimons that rule the Zuma adds fun to the game.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 05, 2012, 08:30:37 AM
This is a question of style. Personally, I see Von Genf's point. If your character's only encounter with the daimons was with an inhuman horror like Screamer, why on earth would you ever try to deal with them again? Why wouldn't you simply try to get as far away from them as possible? Sure, as a PLAYER you can know that there's probably more to them. But if you take your character seriously as a superstitious medieval noble, SMA style, why wouldn't you be terrified given that RP? Continuing to try to interact with them after such an encounter is borderline *insane* from the roleplaying standpoint.

Ans seriously, why would anyone bother to *ask* another realm why they have such a big army? Isn't the answer self-evident? It's there. You know what that means. Enough said. When have armies ever been a subject of diplomatic debate other than in the context of surrender talks?

If that is the character attitude, that there is no point to asking, which is fine mind you, then they sort of don't deserve any other resolution do they. Before hostilities with PeL we were regularly asking each other about why forces appeared on the border. At one stage I had massed our entire army on the border, but that was to go into Metten Dews to rid the region of monsters. As relations were terse we quickly received an inquiry into what our forces were up to.

Let me put it another way, if the force in question is a single unit, owned by the region lord. Now suddenly do you think there might be OTHER reasons the force is there?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Carna on February 05, 2012, 08:39:10 AM
Zuma doing police work? Why didn't we realize it before? Their army isn't meant to threaten half the continent, its there to do police and civil work. Damn decent of them, but we do know they've an unhealthy fondness for the tribes in their claimed lands.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel much relieved.

Finn.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 05, 2012, 09:02:37 AM
Zuma doing police work? Why didn't we realize it before? Their army isn't meant to threaten half the continent, its there to do police and civil work. Damn decent of them, but we do know they've an unhealthy fondness for the tribes in their claimed lands.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I feel much relieved.

Finn.

I would think some of the Lordly duties that require ones presence in the region would probably be more likely, but then perhaps the Zuma are trying massive civil works to try and get the region producing. Of course that is if we are approaching the situation from a game mechanics view.

Now if I'm approaching it from a role play angle, there are PLENTY of reasons for a lord to be in his region, along with his troops.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Geronus on February 05, 2012, 09:25:59 AM
If that is the character attitude, that there is no point to asking, which is fine mind you, then they sort of don't deserve any other resolution do they. Before hostilities with PeL we were regularly asking each other about why forces appeared on the border. At one stage I had massed our entire army on the border, but that was to go into Metten Dews to rid the region of monsters. As relations were terse we quickly received an inquiry into what our forces were up to.

Let me put it another way, if the force in question is a single unit, owned by the region lord. Now suddenly do you think there might be OTHER reasons the force is there?

If Anaris is going to call someone out for not continuing to stick their hand in the fire after having been burned, I'm going to point out how silly that argument is.

You might indeed ask why someone has their entire army massed on your border, but you're not going to ask why someone has a big army in general. As for the Zuma, whatever. I think we get the point you're all trying to make. 'Why don't you try talking to them, and if you do it just right, it will be cool, we promise; the Zuma make sense, really; there's a reason for everything, just try a little harder.' Right. Ok. Message received. Only it seems a lot of people really aren't that interested and/or are frustrated by the results of the efforts they have made. And no one really seems to care about that.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 05, 2012, 09:50:22 AM
If Anaris is going to call someone out for not continuing to stick their hand in the fire after having been burned, I'm going to point out how silly that argument is.

You might indeed ask why someone has their entire army massed on your border, but you're not going to ask why someone has a big army in general. As for the Zuma, whatever. I think we get the point you're all trying to make. 'Why don't you try talking to them, and if you do it just right, it will be cool, we promise; the Zuma make sense, really; there's a reason for everything, just try a little harder.' Right. Ok. Message received. Only it seems a lot of people really aren't that interested and/or are frustrated by the results of the efforts they have made. And no one really seems to care about that.

Why not, if a neighbour of mine suddenly doubled their CS, I would certainly be making inquires as to why that may be.

There is a big difference between not caring about the complaints, and not being convinced that there is a problem that is both significant enough to warrant code changes on shared/interlinked code that covers all NPC realms and a reasonable fix exists for. So far the answers seem to be, restrict the Zuma to only acting within their own borders. Such suggestions are being forwarded to Tom, and if they fit with what he is trying to do we might see some chances. Realise that the members of the Dev team responding here don't know enough about why the Zuma exist to go making radical changes to their mechanics. That will have to be Tom's call, and so far he seems pretty happy with the Zuma GM.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 05, 2012, 12:06:17 PM
Such was not at all my intention. I have great respect for von Genf's player.

I was giving him suggestions for how he might proceed, and a clarification of SMA—couched in the same level of sarcasm his post that I replied to was written with.

No harm done. I did manage to get a response... and maybe I shouldn't post-while-jetlagged.

You might indeed ask why someone has their entire army massed on your border, but you're not going to ask why someone has a big army in general. As for the Zuma, whatever. I think we get the point you're all trying to make. 'Why don't you try talking to them, and if you do it just right, it will be cool, we promise; the Zuma make sense, really; there's a reason for everything, just try a little harder.' Right. Ok. Message received. Only it seems a lot of people really aren't that interested and/or are frustrated by the results of the efforts they have made. And no one really seems to care about that.

Thanks, that is pretty much my point.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 05, 2012, 03:35:54 PM
If Anaris is going to call someone out for not continuing to stick their hand in the fire after having been burned, I'm going to point out how silly that argument is.

Except that that's not what I'm calling him out for.

I'm calling him out for hiding behind SMA for what's actually a character decision.

I don't see any problem with a character who meets Screamer and is then too scared to go meet any other Daimons.

However, I also don't see a problem with a character who meets Screamer, and then says, "Ow. Well, maybe some of the other Daimons are less inimical to my ears."

Look at it this way: I don't know how much von Genf's character knows about the Daimons, but I do know that Alanna, who has never gone nearer to the Zuma than Mattan Dews, and never deliberately sought out information about the Zuma, knows that people have talked to them and gotten useful and interesting information.

Based on that information alone, I would think that someone attempting to follow SMA would, after encountering Screamer, think, "Hm. Well, I guess that must not be the Daimon people talked to to get information. There must be some other Daimons around who are less dangerous just to be near."

I'm not talking about using OOC info IC. I'm not talking about having a casual recklessness for one's own life. I'm just talking about very simple critical thinking skills for our characters. SMA does not, in any way, shape, or form mandate that we abandon such, and I get angry when people try to claim that it does.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 05, 2012, 04:46:12 PM
This is a question of style. Personally, I see Von Genf's point. If your character's only encounter with the daimons was with an inhuman horror like Screamer, why on earth would you ever try to deal with them again? Why wouldn't you simply try to get as far away from them as possible?
It is commonly know, to those that are looking into the daimons, that they are all different. Even Brance, who has never dealt with a daimon personally, and has never specifically researched the daimons, knows that. So I wouldn't see any particular reason why a character wouldn't think "Woops.... that was the wrong one to talk to. Better try a different one...."
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 06, 2012, 02:09:54 AM
It is commonly know, to those that are looking into the daimons, that they are all different. Even Brance, who has never dealt with a daimon personally, and has never specifically researched the daimons, knows that. So I wouldn't see any particular reason why a character wouldn't think "Woops.... that was the wrong one to talk to. Better try a different one...."

Perhaps that's because traumatic experiences don't tend to mix well with rational arguments. If you have a traumatic experience, such as a dog mauling you, you don't think rationally about it. Many times, after a dog attack, a person will have an irrational fear of all dogs, or at least dogs of the breed that attacked them. You may argue to them that such an attack is rare and most dogs aren't like that, but they aren't going to listen to reason, they're going to remember that attack and avoid any contact that causes the fear of another such attack to happen again.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2012, 02:34:46 AM
Perhaps that's because traumatic experiences don't tend to mix well with rational arguments. If you have a traumatic experience, such as a dog mauling you, you don't think rationally about it. Many times, after a dog attack, a person will have an irrational fear of all dogs, or at least dogs of the breed that attacked them. You may argue to them that such an attack is rare and most dogs aren't like that, but they aren't going to listen to reason, they're going to remember that attack and avoid any contact that causes the fear of another such attack to happen again.

That is a possible outcome, not a CERTAIN outcome by any means. But it is also irrelevant unless every single possible character that could interact with the Zuma has suffered such. It is not the GM's job to ensure that every single player character can interact with the Zuma.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 06, 2012, 04:10:24 AM
Perhaps that's because traumatic experiences don't tend to mix well with rational arguments. If you have a traumatic experience, such as a dog mauling you, you don't think rationally about it. Many times, after a dog attack, a person will have an irrational fear of all dogs, or at least dogs of the breed that attacked them. You may argue to them that such an attack is rare and most dogs aren't like that, but they aren't going to listen to reason, they're going to remember that attack and avoid any contact that causes the fear of another such attack to happen again.
That's fine. That is a perfectly good RPd reaction. If you choose to have your character react that way, then that is your choice to do so. But you should also accept that there are other possible reactions.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 06, 2012, 06:17:44 AM
I still have not seen a rebuttal to the proposal of multiple GMs other than hypothetical statements that it will cause problems about identical to the problems that already exist.

That is, no new problems, but possibly some benefits.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 06, 2012, 06:31:57 AM
I still have not seen a rebuttal to the proposal of multiple GMs other than hypothetical statements that it will cause problems about identical to the problems that already exist.

That is, no new problems, but possibly some benefits.

Unless this request comes from the current GM, I will ignore it.

If you think he sucks and is doing a bad job and something needs to be done about it - have the guts to say so. If you don't think that, then kindly leave that decision to the guy who is putting his spare time and effort into providing you with some interaction. He gets absolutely nothing for it, and not pushing in other people without him wanting them there is the least I can do to honour his effort.

Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: egamma on February 06, 2012, 08:35:17 AM
Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

A private "zuma board" here on the forums would do nicely for coordinating multiple GMs. Easy to record treaties, discuss responses, etc.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 06, 2012, 04:23:16 PM
A private "zuma board" here on the forums would do nicely for coordinating multiple GMs. Easy to record treaties, discuss responses, etc.

This.

Beyond that? My understanding is that the Zuma GM has been looking for new GM's for a long long time. Vates was part of that, that GM added a lot and it was a pity that when he left it was so abrupt and information was not carried over. We aren't against multiple GM's (although to be fair it often sounds that way) we are against multiple GM's where there is no system to support them and no thought as to if the new GM's are going to work out. Like Tom said, if and when the current GM finds someone he is happy to work with, things can be worked out.

If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

Hmm, missed Tom's post in their somewhere. Not a surprise given the thread's length.

Is the Zuma GM actually looking for help? If so, it's very subtle.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2012, 04:48:11 PM
Is the Zuma GM actually looking for help? If so, it's very subtle.

What, did you expect him to be posting want ads? :P

GM isn't exactly a job that gets advertised for publicly. It's a highly sensitive position, and only people who have proven themselves to Tom—at least to some extent—will even be considered for it.

Even that doesn't always work to weed out the trolls. Remember Prudent in the Fourth Invasion? Talking about teleporter arrays, orbital cannons, and whatnot?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 06, 2012, 05:09:13 PM
What, did you expect him to be posting want ads? :P

GM isn't exactly a job that gets advertised for publicly. It's a highly sensitive position, and only people who have proven themselves to Tom—at least to some extent—will even be considered for it.

Even that doesn't always work to weed out the trolls. Remember Prudent in the Fourth Invasion? Talking about teleporter arrays, orbital cannons, and whatnot?

I found Prudent quite entertaining. :/

But, yes, if they're looking for GMs, I would expect want ads. It's sensitive, sure; and you don't want folks to know who applied. So post a thread asking for interested people to respond via PM. Maybe no good applicants will come along. But maybe they will.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 06, 2012, 05:31:09 PM
I found Prudent quite entertaining. :/

Prudent's player went out of their way to deliberately subvert or undermine all the roleplay the rest of the Fourth Invasion GMs were writing, and repeatedly refused to join in the efforts to synchronize RP and present a common, consistent, and understandable storyline to the players.

Quote
But, yes, if they're looking for GMs, I would expect want ads. It's sensitive, sure; and you don't want folks to know who applied. So post a thread asking for interested people to respond via PM. Maybe no good applicants will come along. But maybe they will.

Seriously? You think that the position of GM should be treated just like some random job?

How is Tom supposed to judge trustworthiness of random people who apply? "Why, yes, I'll keep all your secrets and make sure to stick closely to all the established RP!" (Two weeks later) "Hey, everybody, here's all the dirt on the Zuma, straight from the source! I know I'll never get a GM position again, BUT IT WAS WORTH IT, BABY! STICK IT TO THE MAN!"

There are enough people whose integrity Tom already trusts, and whose capabilities he knows, to be able to at least look for a new GM from among them before he has to open the gates wide. If he doesn't find one, then I'm sure he'll look at other options—but if he does, why should he even advertise publicly that he's even looking?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Glaumring the Fox on February 06, 2012, 06:48:18 PM
I agree one gm is enough, anymore would open up for abuse.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 07, 2012, 12:48:24 AM
Prudent's player went out of their way to deliberately subvert or undermine all the roleplay the rest of the Fourth Invasion GMs were writing, and repeatedly refused to join in the efforts to synchronize RP and present a common, consistent, and understandable storyline to the players.

Really? Hm. Didn't know. That is quite unfortunate.

Seriously? You think that the position of GM should be treated just like some random job?

How is Tom supposed to judge trustworthiness of random people who apply? "Why, yes, I'll keep all your secrets and make sure to stick closely to all the established RP!" (Two weeks later) "Hey, everybody, here's all the dirt on the Zuma, straight from the source! I know I'll never get a GM position again, BUT IT WAS WORTH IT, BABY! STICK IT TO THE MAN!"

There are enough people whose integrity Tom already trusts, and whose capabilities he knows, to be able to at least look for a new GM from among them before he has to open the gates wide. If he doesn't find one, then I'm sure he'll look at other options—but if he does, why should he even advertise publicly that he's even looking?

Well, I assumed you'd apply through PMs. And, meh, I pretty much always favor open applications. There is no theoretical framework for search costs wherein closed applications yields a reliably more optimal result to my knowledge. Plus, IMHO, Tom probably doesn't have perfect knowledge of peoples' availability or willingness, and he may forget about someone who would be good for it.

Whatever the case, I myself would not apply for Dwilight; at least not for a very long time. I enjoy the non-GM gameplay of Dwilight far too much.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Chenier on February 07, 2012, 01:34:17 AM
If you mean the rotating GM thing, I just can't see that happening. I doubt Tom is about to tell anyone "Hey thanks for all your hard work over the years, but your era is done here is your replacement." Unless the current GM wants to roll with it I would think its dead in the water.

There are plenty of NPC characters. Rotation wouldn't have to mean "okay, you went from controlling all to controlling nothing", bur rather, "you used to control this bit, now control that bit".

I understand the fear of GMs going rogue, though.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: ^ban^ on February 07, 2012, 06:19:31 AM
"you used to control this bit, now control that bit".

...this is a remarkably bad idea. Imagine if you were suddenly forced to play someone else's characters instead of your own. That's what you just proposed.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 07, 2012, 03:28:55 PM
...this is a remarkably bad idea. Imagine if you were suddenly forced to play someone else's characters instead of your own. That's what you just proposed.

Well, it's not the same; GM characters don't "belong" to the GM. But, your point is fair.

I personally, don't see a problem with "terms." Again, as long as the terms are short enough for a medium- to long-term player to be able to see a few shifts happen, and as long as there is overlap in terms, and a private GM subforum, I think it would work fine. The argument that it would create inconsistency or a massive storm of complaints is strange, given that, from many players' perspective, there is already inconsistency and, now, over 30 pages of complaint.

Furthermore, again, a limited-term for a GM reduces the commitment required from them, and would allow them to also have a character on Dwilight occasionally (I am assuming, of course, the Zuma GM doesn't have a character on Dwilight. If he/she does... yeah, IMHO, that would be very not okay).
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 07, 2012, 03:45:18 PM
If you have inconsistency now, and you would have inconsistency then, and a GM forum is used to provide continuity, then are you really gaining anything? If it is done properly, the players shouldn't even know that there was a swap. So, what are you gaining? A rotation that, if done properly, would be invisible to the players. And a growing number of players who know the secrets of the Zuma. Leading to a growing number of players for whom the whole Zuma enigma is... not an enigma. Personally, I'm not seeing a single positive from a "rotating GM" scheme for the Zuma. Not a single one.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Chenier on February 08, 2012, 12:19:03 AM
...this is a remarkably bad idea. Imagine if you were suddenly forced to play someone else's characters instead of your own. That's what you just proposed.

Except that it's not *your* character when it's an NPC character.

If you have inconsistency now, and you would have inconsistency then, and a GM forum is used to provide continuity, then are you really gaining anything? If it is done properly, the players shouldn't even know that there was a swap. So, what are you gaining? A rotation that, if done properly, would be invisible to the players. And a growing number of players who know the secrets of the Zuma. Leading to a growing number of players for whom the whole Zuma enigma is... not an enigma. Personally, I'm not seeing a single positive from a "rotating GM" scheme for the Zuma. Not a single one.

There are plenty of players who don't play on Dwilight. And a rotation wouldn't require 20 players to do. Even a rotation of a mere two would force info to be written down somewhere, or at least shared so that if one guy goes, odds are the other guy knows most of what he did.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 08, 2012, 04:48:01 AM
...force info to be written down somewhere...
Which can be done without even forcing some kind of rotating GM scheme.

So, what exactly is the benefit of a rotating GM scheme again? I'm not seeing one at all here.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 04:55:41 AM
Except that it's not *your* character when it's an NPC character.

There are plenty of players who don't play on Dwilight. And a rotation wouldn't require 20 players to do. Even a rotation of a mere two would force info to be written down somewhere, or at least shared so that if one guy goes, odds are the other guy knows most of what he did.

Wait who says its not the GM's character? He is the one that has put in the effort creating the character, the background and interactions. Apart from the fact that NPCs are tied to individual GM accounts and thus you would have to share accounts to share characters, when has Tom ever stated that the NPC's are some sort of common property of the GM team?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 06:40:04 AM
If you have inconsistency now, and you would have inconsistency then, and a GM forum is used to provide continuity, then are you really gaining anything? If it is done properly, the players shouldn't even know that there was a swap. So, what are you gaining? A rotation that, if done properly, would be invisible to the players. And a growing number of players who know the secrets of the Zuma. Leading to a growing number of players for whom the whole Zuma enigma is... not an enigma. Personally, I'm not seeing a single positive from a "rotating GM" scheme for the Zuma. Not a single one.

You misunderstand me.

I'm not saying someone else should play Haktoo.

I'm saying there should be truly OTHER daimons. As in, inconsistencies of belief, knowledge, and behavior between, say, Screamer, Swift Claw, and Haktoo, are obviously contrived. Messages sent by Haktoo and Swift Claw seem to indicate the GM either repeatedly sends messages/messengers to himself every turn (the current hypothesis Terran's nobles are using), or that the daimons are a hive mind. They all seem to know everything about each others' interactions.

That is, the only justification for inconsistencies is that the GM messed up. We get that happens, obviously.

But I'm suggesting we should hardwire managed inconsistency. We don't have players share Haktoo. We set some kind of timer on Haktoo (either a fixed one or manipulable, hardly matters) with an RP explanation. At the end of it, maybe Haktoo falls asleep. Or maybe Haktoo just is weakened. Or maybe Haktoo goes back into the Netherworld, or whatever. Then, maybe Goobergaboogablag is the new daimon overlord. The GMs coordinate OOCly some for general consistency but, ultimately, are understood by all players and characters to be justifiably and intentionally inconsistent: by design.

You can "overlap" their terms if you want. I prefer the idea of having 3 GMs, 2 active at any time. I can write a more detailed schedule if you want, as well as various ideas for RP explanations.

The advantages gained are:
1. The GMs are freed up: they don't have to be so rigorously consistent, because their divergent and possibly disagreeing personalities are by design. They should agree on "reality," of course, but can have different objectives based on RPs... and not merely in the sense that the current GM may have contrived objectives for each daimon.

2. GMs get a break. They can stop and get an outside perspective for a while; see what it's like to not have all the current information. If their downtime was, say, a year, this could, I think, have a very beneficial effect on GMing.

3. If a GM wants to permanently stop, finding a replacement (and how to fit them in) is comparatively easy, and does not destroy the whole framework.

If you want more benefits, I can continue. But those three seem big to me, and would remove a great deal of the feeling many players have of being toyed with by an overpowered GM. If Tom established a rule, however, stating that all GMs must be in lockstep agreement on all things, and that all IC conflict between their characters was forbidden, it wouldn't achieve very much. But nobody has yet explained to me why such a thing should be the case.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 08, 2012, 07:14:30 AM
You misunderstand me.

I'm not saying someone else should play Haktoo.

I'm saying there should be truly OTHER daimons. As in, inconsistencies of belief, knowledge, and behavior between, say, Screamer, Swift Claw, and Haktoo, are obviously contrived. Messages sent by Haktoo and Swift Claw seem to indicate the GM either repeatedly sends messages/messengers to himself every turn (the current hypothesis Terran's nobles are using), or that the daimons are a hive mind. They all seem to know everything about each others' interactions.

That is, the only justification for inconsistencies is that the GM messed up. We get that happens, obviously.

But I'm suggesting we should hardwire managed inconsistency. We don't have players share Haktoo. We set some kind of timer on Haktoo (either a fixed one or manipulable, hardly matters) with an RP explanation. At the end of it, maybe Haktoo falls asleep. Or maybe Haktoo just is weakened. Or maybe Haktoo goes back into the Netherworld, or whatever. Then, maybe Goobergaboogablag is the new daimon overlord. The GMs coordinate OOCly some for general consistency but, ultimately, are understood by all players and characters to be justifiably and intentionally inconsistent: by design.

You can "overlap" their terms if you want. I prefer the idea of having 3 GMs, 2 active at any time. I can write a more detailed schedule if you want, as well as various ideas for RP explanations.

The advantages gained are:
1. The GMs are freed up: they don't have to be so rigorously consistent, because their divergent and possibly disagreeing personalities are by design. They should agree on "reality," of course, but can have different objectives based on RPs... and not merely in the sense that the current GM may have contrived objectives for each daimon.

2. GMs get a break. They can stop and get an outside perspective for a while; see what it's like to not have all the current information. If their downtime was, say, a year, this could, I think, have a very beneficial effect on GMing.

3. If a GM wants to permanently stop, finding a replacement (and how to fit them in) is comparatively easy, and does not destroy the whole framework.

If you want more benefits, I can continue. But those three seem big to me, and would remove a great deal of the feeling many players have of being toyed with by an overpowered GM. If Tom established a rule, however, stating that all GMs must be in lockstep agreement on all things, and that all IC conflict between their characters was forbidden, it wouldn't achieve very much. But nobody has yet explained to me why such a thing should be the case.

There is unlikely to ever be greater conflict between the daimons then already exists, at least that is my understanding. The why I don't know, that would require a explanation from Tom. It is also very unlikely that Tom would implement a system that basically forces GM's to have a break. We don't tend to reward those that give their time to the project by saying, yeah thanks see you in 6 months.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 08, 2012, 01:56:09 PM
Then, maybe Goobergaboogablag is the new daimon overlord.
OK, you get bonus points for the name. :)

Beyond that, I can't imagine that anything like this would be acceptable. I highly doubt that this rotating scheme would with the existing daimon concepts. They have been continuous and monolithic since the opening of the island. Changing that now would almost certainly break some of the core concepts behind the daimons. They don't have elections, faction, changing leaderships, internal power struggles, etc.

Having said that, the only people who matter when it comes down to changing the Zuma, are ZumaGM and Tom. Not me, not Anaris, not De-Legro. I am pretty sure that ZumaGM will see and read your message. If they decide that your proposed system will help, then maybe they will get together and work something out. I don't personally see it happening, but who knows.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 03:42:46 PM
Beyond that, I can't imagine that anything like this would be acceptable. I highly doubt that this rotating scheme would with the existing daimon concepts. They have been continuous and monolithic since the opening of the island. Changing that now would almost certainly break some of the core concepts behind the daimons. They don't have elections, faction, changing leaderships, internal power struggles, etc.

Having said that, the only people who matter when it comes down to changing the Zuma, are ZumaGM and Tom. Not me, not Anaris, not De-Legro. I am pretty sure that ZumaGM will see and read your message. If they decide that your proposed system will help, then maybe they will get together and work something out. I don't personally see it happening, but who knows.

To your first paragraph, my response is: "Vates" And behold, falsification is possible!

For the second.... I know. I just post here because I want to see if there is criticism beyond, "Tom won't like it." The feel I'm getting is that the only final criticism people have of it is that it isn't how the Zuma have been done in the past.

There is unlikely to ever be greater conflict between the daimons then already exists, at least that is my understanding. The why I don't know, that would require a explanation from Tom. It is also very unlikely that Tom would implement a system that basically forces GM's to have a break. We don't tend to reward those that give their time to the project by saying, yeah thanks see you in 6 months.

I guess I can't speak for the GM here, but I know that, for me, I would not mind having a break on a character. Especially if it was on Dwilight, and I could then have a new character on Dwilight. That is, assuming the GM has no other Dwilight account... that means the GM has never actually played normal BM on Dwilight, one of the most unique and interesting continents in BM (and, IMHO, the most fun). I think we reward the GM by making their job easier by dividing the work and creating a structure likely to reduce complaints and address legitimate grievances, and then by allowing them a chance to experience part of the game from which they have otherwise been excluded. I guess we can interpret a break from being a GM as a "penalty" of some kind.... but then I would never see being a GM as a "reward" in the first place. I see it as a public service.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 08, 2012, 04:24:07 PM
To your first paragraph, my response is: "Vates" And behold, falsification is possible!
Yes, there was a second GM. But that second GM did not constitute a separate faction, power struggle, or change in leadership. The Zuma themselves have, so far as I am aware, always been a continuous institution.

Quote
The feel I'm getting is that the only final criticism people have of it is that it isn't how the Zuma have been done in the past.
What "the Zuma have done in the past" constitutes their body of RP, concept, and characterization. Asking them to change their leadership structure for some kind of rotating leadership role requires them to break with their standing RP and concept.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 05:15:02 PM
Yes, there was a second GM. But that second GM did not constitute a separate faction, power struggle, or change in leadership. The Zuma themselves have, so far as I am aware, always been a continuous institution.

Vates was ruler. Now Haktoo is. Change in leadership. Vates was polite and fairly cultured. Haktoo is not. Change in culture. I can't speak for any internal factions or power struggles; and I don't demand that there actually be huge divisiveness. I just would like to see the daimons not be perfectly united. I'm fine with them being a Very Loyal Realm. I'm not as fine with none of them having personal ambitions.

What "the Zuma have done in the past" constitutes their body of RP, concept, and characterization. Asking them to change their leadership structure for some kind of rotating leadership role requires them to break with their standing RP and concept.

This is true, and I understand that. If my plan were adopted, there could be no change at all for a few months while more GMs are found. Once they are found, by that time, hopefully, an RP framework could be constructed in a plausible fashion. The first daimons would not "take a break" for months if not over a year from now, if we implemented today. I feel confident that continuous, fluid, reasonable RPs could be constructed to explain this change over the next several months.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: JPierreD on February 08, 2012, 05:24:21 PM
This is true, and I understand that. If my plan were adopted, there could be no change at all for a few months while more GMs are found. Once they are found, by that time, hopefully, an RP framework could be constructed in a plausible fashion. The first daimons would not "take a break" for months if not over a year from now, if we implemented today. I feel confident that continuous, fluid, reasonable RPs could be constructed to explain this change over the next several months.

What problem would the change address?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 08, 2012, 05:29:21 PM
What problem would the change address?

The problem that Vellos can't infiltrate the Zuma to instigate a rebellion, play one against another, or otherwise drive wedges into what's canonically a very tight-knit group that trusts each other and doesn't much trust outsiders.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Gustav Kuriga on February 08, 2012, 05:37:38 PM
The problem that Vellos can't infiltrate the Zuma to instigate a rebellion, play one against another, or otherwise drive wedges into what's canonically a very tight-knit group that trusts each other and doesn't much trust outsiders.

How about we try not to put words into people's mouths that they did not mean.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 07:54:56 PM
What problem would the change address?

Namely, that numerous (anecdotally the majority) players around the Zuma find their presence as they currently are to have a chilling effect on gameplay in the realms around them. Based on their enormous strength, uncanny unity, and (for many players, but I gather not all) unintelligible objectives, they serve as a kind of "black hole" where all things around them are sucked into whatever they are doing. Simultaneously, because the Zuma are presented as being extremely unified, any time they are inconsistent (or appear to be) it causes major disruptions among players who have assumed consistency from the Zuma. Forming a strategy assuming they will be inconsistent (a "Black Swan" strategy) doesn't get you anywhere, but forming a strategy assuming they will be consistent (most realms around the Zuma until recently) gets you randomly and (at first and to a degree) inexplicably invaded. Usually with enough laborious digging you can find out that it wasn't random and inexplicable, but few players (again, based on my perceptions) find that digging entertaining.

Introducing multiple GMs would not fix the problem of their strength, but would address unity/consistency issues, and, if set up as I suggested, the issue of unintelligible objectives. Namely, having built-in, structured inconsistency (that is, having genuinely different "characters" among the Zuma, who truly do not have perfect knowledge-sharing and do not operate as a perfect team) would allow players to cultivate a more stable playing style. Inconsistency would in fact be built in, but it would be a more manageable inconsistency. In addition, the Zuma being more individualized would form more interesting interactions for players (and, with multiple GMs, be more available to players), and thus would be able to make the exploration of the Zuma more interesting and multi-faceted. Everybody wins (especially the current GM, who would have a reduced workload)

Furthermore, players would no longer have to feel like they were playing against multis and clans quite as much, recruiting GMs would be easier, replacing GMs would be easier, and GMs could have an experience of seeing their actions from the outside on a periodic basis.

From my perspective, those are the major benefits.

The problem that Vellos can't infiltrate the Zuma to instigate a rebellion, play one against another, or otherwise drive wedges into what's canonically a very tight-knit group that trusts each other and doesn't much trust outsiders.

You are really taking this argument personally, aren't you?

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.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 08, 2012, 08:04:37 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.

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?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 08, 2012, 08:12:46 PM
Do you just not believe me in this, or are you truly not grasping the concept?

He's saying he thinks that concept makes the game less fun.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 08, 2012, 08:19:13 PM
Quote
He's saying he thinks that concept makes the game less fun.
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.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: vonGenf on February 08, 2012, 08:36:36 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.

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.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 08, 2012, 09:51:26 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.

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.

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?

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:

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.

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.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 08, 2012, 10:01:37 PM
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.

And this is where I disagree.

Unless what the players want is simply to be told, "There are four different people playing the Zuma now. There's absolutely no difference to how they will interact with you or the policies you will see, but there are four different people now doing the exact same thing that one did before," I do not see how your proposal will address any of the complaints.

Essentially, it seems to me that you want more people playing the Zuma either a) simply for the sake of having more people playing them, or b) to make them more like a player-run realm.

Except that A is a woefully insufficient reason to do such a thing, and B ignores or outright dismisses the fact that the Zuma are not, and never were, intended to be like a player-run realm.

In summary, I do not see that you have shown either that the changes you propose will address everyone's criticisms, or that they will be reasonable and beneficial in general.  They might address your criticisms (though I am deeply skeptical, and strongly suspect that within 2 months of such a change, you would be back complaining that there might as well still be one Zuma GM, and your proposed change didn't actually amount to anything), but other people in this thread had other criticisms.

And, finally, if you would be satisfied with the Zuma getting an additional GM, sharing some of the work, without actually changing any of the way the Zuma interact with you...

...Would you be happy if I just came out and told you, "There. The Zuma now have a new GM. Don't notice any difference? That's because he's very good at following in the established RP and policies of the Zuma."?
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on February 08, 2012, 10:15:59 PM
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.

Sending Zuma humans (or false humans made to look that way) (with tattooed faces) dressed as monks to address characters within the Zuma realm - openly mocking (that is how it is taken IC and how it has been stated IC that it was taken IC)

Having members of your realm enter the lands of the Zuma without giving any notice before hand - something you already know IC causes trouble and something that happened after you already knew it caused trouble. A perceived intentional insult. (as it was taken IC and was stated IC).

Discuss and debate ways ahead all you want, but don't spread false information.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 09, 2012, 12:28:22 AM
Sending Zuma humans (or false humans made to look that way) (with tattooed faces) dressed as monks to address characters within the Zuma realm - openly mocking (that is how it is taken IC and how it has been stated IC that it was taken IC)


Ah yes, and Garret... forwarded his seeing of the monks? Because that was clearly a message written down on paper that he could forward to Haktoo.

He copied and pasted a *roleplay*. Haktoo knows that humans lie and knows that Garret has misrepresented things in the past. Haktoo never even saw those monks. When I realized that you were going to go ahead and assume knowledge of them, I went ahead and made them present for Swift Claw. The original intent was for you the GM to see what was going on, but not for Haktoo ICly to "know." But I guess I assumed more restraint than was present.

Furthermore, almost every message refers to the foolish ruler of Terran, and rarely in a context directly and immediately connected to the discussion of the message to Garret. Swift Claw didn't even raise the issue with Hireshmont, other than executing the group he saw. Other characters have literally insulted Haktoo directly to her face, as in, direct verbal antagonism and practically harassment. But oh well. Guess I'm missing something that I should figure out IC.

Nice to know you're still reading, though. I do wish you'd reply to some of the more substantive parts of the discussion besides commentary on small issues with your GMing.

Unless what the players want is simply to be told, "There are four different people playing the Zuma now. There's absolutely no difference to how they will interact with you or the policies you will see, but there are four different people now doing the exact same thing that one did before," I do not see how your proposal will address any of the complaints.

Did you not read my post?

I have clearly stated that I would like to see changes made to how the Zuma act. I have not asked for radical changes, but I would like some changes. Having multiple GMs will cause some of those changes right off the bat. Biggest change: disputes about truth. I want there to be real doubt within the Zuma Coalition about what may have been said or not said, promised to not promised, to humans.

I'm not asking them to be played like a human realm in the sense of having petty squabbles and merely political objectives. Please stop putting words in my mouth, Tim. Maybe I was immature in some of this discussion earlier; I was very frustrated, that's entirely possible. But did I personally attack you like this?

I'm not asking for the Zuma Coalition to be a human realm. I'm asking that it's GMing be taken off of God-mode slightly (just Daimon-mode will be fine). Limitations on knowledge would be a big part of that.

No, if you told me that the 4 GMs would change absolutely nothing and would all post every message they sent or received onto a forum where they were all perfectly confident nobody was lying, and would all be sure to log with equal regularity and always make coordinated moves, that would not fix the problem. And that's never what I proposed. On the other hand, don't keep "spreading false information" (as the Zuma GM likes to put it) that I'm suggesting the Zuma Coalition should just be like a human faction with GM-controlled nobles. I am not now, nor have I ever, advocated that.

Tim, I have a question for you: do you think there are any problems with how the Zuma have been implemented, and how the game experience involving them has played out? Because the impression I'm getting (that normally I would discount because I have a lot of respect for you, but your attacks on me are making me curious) is that you think they're a flawless and genius addition to BM, and anyone who disagrees is just dumb.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Anaris on February 09, 2012, 01:14:35 AM
Tim, I have a question for you: do you think there are any problems with how the Zuma have been implemented, and how the game experience involving them has played out? Because the impression I'm getting (that normally I would discount because I have a lot of respect for you, but your attacks on me are making me curious) is that you think they're a flawless and genius addition to BM, and anyone who disagrees is just dumb.

Yes, I certainly do. I've discussed some of these with the Zuma GM.

Here's some public ones:

I think that Vates was handled extremely poorly as an extension of the Zuma. Too little coordination, and then inactivity without real warning.

I think that the forged letter could have been handled better. I agree with the principle that for the Zuma to try to do something (or even threaten to do something) against a particular realm, it should take action by that realm. Not necessarily public, official action, but some action by the realm or someone with some credible claim to represent it.

I think Tom should have communicated better to the dev team about what the Zuma needed so that we could ensure that the code would support it better.

As part of that, I think that humans should have been far more selectively allowed to join the Zuma Coalition, so as to avoid debacles like (IIRC) Valentine's attempted secession of Nightmarch. (I think that's what happened, anyway.) If we had not had things like that happen, it might not have been necessary to bar all further humans from joining the Zuma.

I think that if more GMs could be found who were known to be active and fully willing to coordinate solidly with the existing GM, that would help to ensure that a) the existing GM was not so badly swamped with the required replies and actions, and b) people who interact with the Zuma will, on average, receive better replies faster. (Note that I do not say anything in here about variety: I've never opposed extra GMs, I just don't think they'll solve the problems people have with the Zuma.)
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 09, 2012, 01:24:21 AM
Ah yes, and Garret... forwarded his seeing of the monks? Because that was clearly a message written down on paper that he could forward to Haktoo.

He copied and pasted a *roleplay*. Haktoo knows that humans lie and knows that Garret has misrepresented things in the past. Haktoo never even saw those monks. When I realized that you were going to go ahead and assume knowledge of them, I went ahead and made them present for Swift Claw. The original intent was for you the GM to see what was going on, but not for Haktoo ICly to "know." But I guess I assumed more restraint than was present.

Furthermore, almost every message refers to the foolish ruler of Terran, and rarely in a context directly and immediately connected to the discussion of the message to Garret. Swift Claw didn't even raise the issue with Hireshmont, other than executing the group he saw. Other characters have literally insulted Haktoo directly to her face, as in, direct verbal antagonism and practically harassment. But oh well. Guess I'm missing something that I should figure out IC.

Nice to know you're still reading, though. I do wish you'd reply to some of the more substantive parts of the discussion besides commentary on small issues with your GMing.

Did you not read my post?

I have clearly stated that I would like to see changes made to how the Zuma act. I have not asked for radical changes, but I would like some changes. Having multiple GMs will cause some of those changes right off the bat. Biggest change: disputes about truth. I want there to be real doubt within the Zuma Coalition about what may have been said or not said, promised to not promised, to humans.

I'm not asking them to be played like a human realm in the sense of having petty squabbles and merely political objectives. Please stop putting words in my mouth, Tim. Maybe I was immature in some of this discussion earlier; I was very frustrated, that's entirely possible. But did I personally attack you like this?

I'm not asking for the Zuma Coalition to be a human realm. I'm asking that it's GMing be taken off of God-mode slightly (just Daimon-mode will be fine). Limitations on knowledge would be a big part of that.

No, if you told me that the 4 GMs would change absolutely nothing and would all post every message they sent or received onto a forum where they were all perfectly confident nobody was lying, and would all be sure to log with equal regularity and always make coordinated moves, that would not fix the problem. And that's never what I proposed. On the other hand, don't keep "spreading false information" (as the Zuma GM likes to put it) that I'm suggesting the Zuma Coalition should just be like a human faction with GM-controlled nobles. I am not now, nor have I ever, advocated that.

Tim, I have a question for you: do you think there are any problems with how the Zuma have been implemented, and how the game experience involving them has played out? Because the impression I'm getting (that normally I would discount because I have a lot of respect for you, but your attacks on me are making me curious) is that you think they're a flawless and genius addition to BM, and anyone who disagrees is just dumb.

Zuma Masters don't lie, that is part of why the forgery worked. In that context I can't see there being huge issues between multiple GM's about what was promised to whom, unless someone wants to break the background for the Zuma. This has always been in my mind one of the biggest problems with multiple GM's. Either they work together so well you'd never even know there was multiples, or you get GM's running off and doing their own thing to the point it is detrimental to the culture.

The Zuma currently work because the GM we have can be relied upon to follow Tom's guidelines to the letter. Very few people are willing to invest what amounts to several hours each and every day to chafe under the restriction this imposes when they have so much BETTER ideas if only we ignore this instruction here, or that piece of background there.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Vellos on February 09, 2012, 04:23:09 AM
Zuma Masters don't lie, that is part of why the forgery worked.

.... what is this referencing? I wasn't talking about the forgery. I was talking about a recent message to Garret where I, the player of Hireshmont, phrased the message as a pun on how the Zuma GM phrases messages to others. I did it partly because I want those connected with the Zuma (the Zuma GM and Artemesia) to OOCly start to understand how frustrating it is to work with them, also because I was hoping it would provoke an interesting RP where I could learn about the Zuma (the Zuma GM has opted to respond with RPs where said Zuma Triunists are summarily executed without much explanation; and OOC saying that I'm RPing something that, as I understand it, cannot exist: I apparently didn't play Zumamaster long enough to know that 99% conversion rates aren't high enough to have a couple Zuma monks; I guess you need a perfect 100%?).

In that context I can't see there being huge issues between multiple GM's about what was promised to whom, unless someone wants to break the background for the Zuma. This has always been in my mind one of the biggest problems with multiple GM's. Either they work together so well you'd never even know there was multiples, or you get GM's running off and doing their own thing to the point it is detrimental to the culture.

The Zuma currently work because the GM we have can be relied upon to follow Tom's guidelines to the letter. Very few people are willing to invest what amounts to several hours each and every day to chafe under the restriction this imposes when they have so much BETTER ideas if only we ignore this instruction here, or that piece of background there.

See... I don't buy that. I'm partially curious to know how you know that the Zuma GM has perfectly followed all of Tom's guidelines to the letter. I'm also curious to know how you have such faith that Tom's guidelines are perfect or optimal. Neither of these things seem obvious.

But even aside from that, I have a hard time believing that there is only ever one valid Zuma response to a human action. That is, without knowing Tom's guidelines (maybe he really has created some vast matrix of Action-->Response info), I suspect that any human action has numerous theoretically possible responses within the "rules" for Zuma. Of that set, there is probably another set of responses greater than 1 within those rules that also meet some arbitrary definition of "fun." Of that set, there is probably another set of responses greater than 1 that could be simultaneously implemented by different daimons that would be "non-contradictory" or at least not oppositional.

Not knowing Tom's guidelines, I can't say this with certainty. But most rules I can imagine would allow for the above to be true. Which reveals the use of more, possibly non-identical, probably cognitively separate daimons (read: another GM, or more than 1 more). Because there may be multiple responses that can be pursued simultaneously by different agents, but which would be harder to pursue in good faith for one person, for any number of reasons.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: De-Legro on February 09, 2012, 04:28:04 AM
.... what is this referencing? I wasn't talking about the forgery. I was talking about a recent message to Garret where I, the player of Hireshmont, phrased the message as a pun on how the Zuma GM phrases messages to others. I did it partly because I want those connected with the Zuma (the Zuma GM and Artemesia) to OOCly start to understand how frustrating it is to work with them, also because I was hoping it would provoke an interesting RP where I could learn about the Zuma (the Zuma GM has opted to respond with RPs where said Zuma Triunists are summarily executed without much explanation; and OOC saying that I'm RPing something that, as I understand it, cannot exist: I apparently didn't play Zumamaster long enough to know that 99% conversion rates aren't high enough to have a couple Zuma monks; I guess you need a perfect 100%?).


Perhaps the issue here is less that their are Zuma Triunuist and more that the Masters feel that adopting the position of monk is tantamount to abandoning their duties to the masters. The last view RP's I've had with the Zuma Humans implies that everything revolves around doing their duty. So long as they are not lax in that duty they seem to have a fair bit of leeway.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Zuma GM on February 09, 2012, 07:48:21 AM
Ah yes, and Garret... forwarded his seeing of the monks? Because that was clearly a message written down on paper that he could forward to Haktoo.

He copied and pasted a *roleplay*. Haktoo knows that humans lie and knows that Garret has misrepresented things in the past. Haktoo never even saw those monks. When I realized that you were going to go ahead and assume knowledge of them, I went ahead and made them present for Swift Claw. The original intent was for you the GM to see what was going on, but not for Haktoo ICly to "know." But I guess I assumed more restraint than was present.

I am not getting involved with the other debates as it seems that no matter what I say, unless I agree completely with everything you say, that it will be wrong.

You make OOC assumptions about how things are done. How do you know how Garret passed on that information to me? How do you know how my characters then took that information?

You complain about the fact that the Daimons instantly know everything that is going on everywhere without trying to see if, IC, there is a way that such things could be justified. I have to deal with player characters that know almost instantly of things that have gone one nowhere near them, yet for me to be able to do things this way it is somehow unfair. No, I do not send multiple messages between all my characters, as has been said, I spend enough of my time on all this already.

I am not going to explain how things are done via the forums, some people have discovered this IC (by staying IC and not immediately complaining OOC how I must be abusing something somehow). This includes people within your own realm.

Dealing with you in an OOC manner is incredibly frustrating due to your attitude. So I will step in and correct things when people flat out lie (not necessarily intentionally, but perhaps due to them taking their assumptions about how something must have been done as fact), but I will not get involved with the debate on the way ahead as it just drains my interest and my time.
Title: Re: Zuma/Daimons
Post by: Indirik on February 09, 2012, 02:50:42 PM
I'm going to call this thread done. Everyone has had a chance to say their part. We're just going in circles now. Any final decision on what to do with this issue will have to be taken by Tom and the ZumaGM.