Messages

166

Background / Re: What do you think is wrong?

« on: March 29, 2011, 10:49:48 PM »

What bothers me:

I can no longer write an RP in first person or limited third person and share it with the whole realm, because now private thoughts are considered public knowledge if published. 

Medieval misoginy. Yeah, I understand it's historically accurate.  But I'm not sure if it's fun in the game.  (Some discussion on this is going on in the split thread.)

Nobles publicly acknowledging they are blood-related to an adventurer.  That's supposed to be shameful.

167

Wiki / Re: The Wiki - A Valid In Game and In Character Source?

« on: March 29, 2011, 10:40:55 PM »

Yes, I remember your character objecting to it.  Thanks.

And yes, I'm ranting about the way the treaty and the wiki were done.  And there's nothing wrong with IC gripes.  Please don't take it as an OOC attack.  As a player, am not very comfortable with how things were done, so I am speaking against it.  And I only mentioned it because it seems someone assumed I am an idiot for asking about the treaty.

168

Background / Re: Human Nature

« on: March 29, 2011, 10:26:56 PM »

She's a keeper!

I've had two characters get married. Neither was very awkward. Then again, one of them was basically a completely political marriage (Hireshmont and Retravic).

That one was superfun!  Was that in Irombrozia? 

169

Background / Re: What do you think is wrong?

« on: March 29, 2011, 10:21:46 PM »

Another thing that bothers me:
The infrequency of marriage.

That one bothers me in 2011 real life.   

170

Wiki / Re: The Wiki - A Valid In Game and In Character Source?

« on: March 29, 2011, 04:46:42 PM »

The constitution was voted on by the realm.

A poorly drafted document with lots of sections "to be filled in later" was voted. 

The Forum was part of the constitution, its simply an in game message group, one of the four that each realm is allowed. Any noble of the realm can join it.

False.  Only those Sir Galiard included in the message group were in it.

The treaty was discussed within that message group, as stipulated by the constitution, which was passed by referendum.

See my point?

I understand that your character refuses to join the forum as a protest against it and the other reforms, but to claim the treaty wasn't handled correctly IG simply because for what ever reason you choose not to avail yourself of the source of information is beyond ridiculous. You can't have it both ways, you can't protest against the current democratically ratified system, and expect to have access to everything discussed under that system.

My character never refused to join the forum.  Sir Galiard refused to include her. 

171

Wiki / Re: The Wiki - A Valid In Game and In Character Source?

« on: March 29, 2011, 04:38:17 PM »

That is not true. The treaty was passed in-game, and posted on the wiki for reference. This is a perfectly acceptable use of the wiki.

For clarification, the "forum" was an in-game message group named the Forum, not a separate out-of-game discussion forum. It was a message group where anyone could join to discuss realm matters, just by asking the ruler.

The ruler being Galiard Scarlet, and never including me in that message group.  Not even when Duke Iceberg told him to. 

And, as I said above, this was all discussed in-game. Just because you don't remember the discussion or weren't paying attention to it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So you expect him to just retype the whole thing from memory every time you ask for it? If he copies and pastes it into a text file to save it on his computer, is that unacceptable because then he's playing NotepadMaster?

The wiki is a perfectly acceptable IC resource, especially in the way Galiard's player used it. The document was posted both IG and on the wiki, and links were given to the wiki page several times. Discussion was held extensively in the realm about it, with many quite "spirited" discussions. I'm sorry you object to using the wiki as a reference for the posting of documents so they can be referenced after the 30-day expiration of IG messages. But seeing as how most people, including yourself, can't be bothered to actually personally save copies of these things, the wiki is the place for these things to be posted for future reference. It is publicly available for everyone to use. In fact, it should be used more often.

I am not against the use of the Wiki.   But I do see a problem in relying so heavily on it that it replaces in game experience.  Editing a page in the Wiki and adding to the discussion page are very different experiences from having a character propose and discuss a document.  And I'm not into publishing things on the Wiki that have little to do with what goes on in game. 

172

Wiki / Re: The Wiki - A Valid In Game and In Character Source?

« on: March 29, 2011, 11:47:05 AM »

Maybe it was played well in Arcaea.  In Ohnar West it was not properly done.

173

Wiki / The Wiki - A Valid In Game and In Character Source?

« on: March 29, 2011, 06:51:18 AM »

What is it with people in OW? The treaty is ON THE WIKI. Read it.

The problem was that the treaty was made on the wiki but not played IN GAME. 
The game should be played in the game, not in the stupid wiki. 
The player of Galiard Scarlett seemed to be playing a whole different game than the rest of Ohnar West, with a forum and a constitution and a treaty that were all published on the wiki but not talked about in the game where it is supposed to be played.

 And yes, that pisses me off.  I play Battlemaster.  I do not play Wikimaster.

174

BM General Discussion / Re: New General elected by realm they are at war with.

« on: March 29, 2011, 12:32:06 AM »

Call it He who must be obeyed-ism

175

Helpline / Re: Best way to deal with this situation: Can't Colonize?

« on: March 28, 2011, 10:16:03 PM »

Other than get some other realm to run the CTO.

There was a time where Ohnar West could run it... but now Enlod hates both realms with a passion. 

Also, diplomat work in changing the view of minor nobility is not very effective.  Or maybe they hated Arcaea so much that badmouthing them doesn't make any difference anyway. 

176

Dwilight / Re: Barca

« on: March 28, 2011, 08:44:41 PM »

Ok, so basically, Rettleville is a pretty darn tough place to maintain, even though it isn't too bad once you get the security. Its regions are pretty easy to feed, assuming you can get the food to the peasants' mouths and not the monsters'.

I think we're getting peasants to the monster's mouths.  Problem solved.
 

177

BM General Discussion / Re: Character Alignments

« on: March 28, 2011, 08:42:47 PM »

Delicia is too old to care about anything, so I'd say neutral neutral.  Perhaps it's time for her to retire. 

Randwulf is Chaotic Good.  Well, maybe he's really Neutral Good.   He was Chaotic in PeL, because it's difficult to be lawful when the Queen is not only evil but also an Anaris.  :-P   I think he'll be more lawful in Barca. 

Brenda started as Lawful Good.  I think she moved towards Neutral Good during Galiard's rule, but maybe she'll get back to Lawful if Joseph wins next elections.  Or perhaps she'll turn totally neutral.

Ortisia is true Neutral, perhaps she's becoming more lawful and a little bit evil.




And I took the alignment test and it seems that my real life persona is chaotic neutral.  I thought I was good.  (At least I didn't score any evil points, I'm just more neutral than good.)

178

Dwilight / Barca

« on: March 28, 2011, 07:45:55 PM »

Ack, settling and starting up a new colony is so slow that it gets frustrating.  There is only one recruitment center that still hasn't recruited anyone.  And I built a scouts guild but it took ages to make one scout available.  Doing nothing but wait is getting a little bit boring. 

179

Dwilight / Re: Dwilight IC and OOC updates and news!

« on: March 28, 2011, 07:40:04 PM »

Secession from PeL.  What happened there?  Details?

180

Far East Island / Re: Down with the peace keepers!

« on: March 28, 2011, 07:09:20 PM »

Did the treaty between Jenred and Galiard say anything as to what would happen if Arcaea failed to take over Enlod as planned? 
The discussion in Ohnar West is somewhat "ok, we helped, and they didn't take it over... now what?"