Sanguis Astroism

[De-Legro]

You made the General of the strongest military power of Dwilight the most pious man of your Church, sure that will improve the image we all have about Sanguis Astroim.

It improves mine, now they at least be to be HONEST about things

[Dishman]

Does anyone enjoy the Roland story, or should I stop? Does it need more or less details?

It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.

A clear enemy, a fire under you, and something to be gained does wonders for getting invested in characters. Dozens of schemes will be made in the "ashes" of SA. The RP of SA will continue on reshaped, even if it is not in the original church.

[Zakilevo]

Because many of us invest years into this game, we sometimes are too attached to the game. BM is still only a game. Let's try to enjoy it not get angry over it.

After a year or two, you will probably tell yourself it isn't so bad.

[Chenier]

It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.

The counter movement is stupid and relies on us putting faith in the one who pulled the dick move to begin with. The feeling isn't coming from being defeated, it's from how it was done, which we don't consider to be "playing with friends".

Does anyone enjoy the Roland story, or should I stop? Does it need more or less details?

A clear enemy, a fire under you, and something to be gained does wonders for getting invested in characters. Dozens of schemes will be made in the "ashes" of SA. The RP of SA will continue on reshaped, even if it is not in the original church.

We already had clear enemies, internal threats, and things to be gained. People are de-investing themselves in their characters, not the other way around.

Because many of us invest years into this game, we sometimes are too attached to the game. BM is still only a game. Let's try to enjoy it not get angry over it.

After a year or two, you will probably tell yourself it isn't so bad.

No. When people I play with play like dicks, I don't say "oh, it's a game, so it's fine that they act like a dick". I go play with other people.

I've seen a number of dicky things in this game, over the years, and I have not changed my mind about any of them, despite how many years have passed. None have ever been anywhere close to this level.

[Dishman]

Figured I'd share this with people who paused, deleted, are interested. I'll limit it to this blurb, but it essentially explains most of my character.

A Mystic's Manifesto

In the promotion of paganism, and the establishment of a more diverse and powerful pantheon, I have given the church to it's enemy. A kind of homage to my mentor. A man who appreciated irony. One who also appreciated belief. It was through belief that I gave the church to Jonsu. I am sure there are many wails about the charter, the sanctity of the 'real' prophet, and such dressings. But those that prepare your food, feed your larders, and run your church's temples do not believe in the church...they believe in the Bloodstars. Charter, politics, beurocracy....these were secondary. The peasants sought the church to guide them to the Bloodstars, little more. It is much the same as we treat them, we use them to our benifit but care little for their affairs.

This helped me greatly in orchestrating such a reform. The prophet gone, the theocracies defeated. Many feared that the church had faltered without the prophet and true guidance was needed. Given the option of denouncing her, they embraced her. They wanted to believe. They wanted to believe these strange omens were the Bloodstars preparing them for their tribulations into harmony. A new prophet was just one of those tribulations. How convenient that the monsters would stir? I had thought the toppling of a theocracy and the surrender of the remaining three would be enough. How strange belief is.

Belief, the core of a religion, is malleable. A few words here, a few there. Anyone can believe anything you want if you know how to approach them. Of course, it didn't hurt to be declared 'closest to the prophet'. It was difficult to believe in a bickering council or a priest army...but a prophet, a god, or a messiah. A singular entity seems to draw people. A focus of faith and guidance, a father to show the way. The irony!

It was not my intent to destroy Sanguis Astroism, as I know that it will persevere. Once a faith has been added to the registry, it is eternal. Yet I expect SA to continue with strength. Perhaps diminished, but that is the point. The stifling of paganism, new religions, or any attempt to deny freedom of belief shall be met with undesirable consequences. Let this be Dwilight's first warning.

-Sub Rosa

[Indirik]

I'll limit it to this blurb, but it essentially explains most of my character.

None of that means anything to anyone who was affected by this. If any of that was apparent in your character *before* you had done what you had done, then people would have a valid point about "hoisted on your own petard", or whatever that phrase is. But as it turned out, all your character was to 99.5% of the people in SA, was 1) the perfect sleeper, or 2) went inexplicably insane with no warning.


Damn... I wasn't going to comment on this thread....

[De-Legro]

Figured I'd share this with people who paused, deleted, are interested. I'll limit it to this blurb, but it essentially explains most of my character.

I think the term you want is polytheistic not paganism.

Besides how does one establish a pantheon? Unless the gods are created by our worship surely the Pantheon already exists and either we are ignorant of it, or have consciously decided not to worship it.

[Graeth]

Besides how does one establish a pantheon?

It's a central part of Mysticism.

I wasn't aware Enoch was a mystic until all this...
Is Jonsu?  Cause that would really make a lot of sense of the current situation.

[pcw27]

It looks like many people are feeling hurt because they got too connected to something of BM. Which is a shame. Sometimes you have to accept that everything you worked for vaporises into thin air. But from ashes a phoenix can rise, so instead of the (OOC-)rage, it might be better to channel all your anger into an ingame counter movement. Heck, I've been there countless times in the many years I played BM, and even though it did sting for a long time in the beginning, after a while I realised that it allowed me to explore other paths in BM which turned out to be so much better.

The problem is how disproportionately difficult it will be to take back power compared to how easily it was taken. This is due entirely to weak game mechanics. The coup to begin with was an abuse of OOC information because Justin's character should not have been aware that there was a functional difference between the validity of the charter and the validity of a decree by the regent. Jonsu would have no reason to think the temple acolytes will take the orders of the regent over those of a dozen people who give the regent his power in the first place.

BM isn't supposed to be about finding game breaking mechanics, its supposed to be about player to player interaction. The loyalties of hundreds of players shouldn't be so easily trumped by an alliance between two.

[Stabbity]

The problem is how disproportionately difficult it will be to take back power compared to how easily it was taken. This is due entirely to weak game mechanics. The coup to begin with was an abuse of OOC information because Justin's character should not have been aware that there was a functional difference between the validity of the charter and the validity of a decree by the regent. Jonsu would have no reason to think the temple acolytes will take the orders of the regent over those of a dozen people who give the regent his power in the first place.

BM isn't supposed to be about finding game breaking mechanics, its supposed to be about player to player interaction. The loyalties of hundreds of players shouldn't be so easily trumped by an alliance between two.

1) How many game announcements do you need to believe its not abuse?

2) Are you aware of the workings of the world around you? Yes? So are our characters. They are not dumb, and the workings of game mechanics, i.e. their world, is not unknown to them. Delvin's statements on infiltrators is a really good example.

[De-Legro]

It's a central part of Mysticism.

I wasn't aware Enoch was a mystic until all this...
Is Jonsu?  Cause that would really make a lot of sense of the current situation.

Semantics, but Mysticism doesn't establish a Pantheon it provides mechanics for people to ascend and thus add to a pre-existing Pantheon.

[Dishman]

It's a central part of Mysticism.

I wasn't aware Enoch was a mystic until all this...
Is Jonsu?  Cause that would really make a lot of sense of the current situation.

I can't give too much away, but Enoch is hoping to revive Mysticism. I hadn't heard anything in Mysticism since Bowie left.

But as it turned out, all your character was to 99.5% of the people in SA, was 1) the perfect sleeper, or 2) went inexplicably insane with no warning.

I tried to make it clear Enoch did not have good intentions. He laid it on thick, then never did anything. Why, when the Regency campaign begin he was all "I will serve the stars if that is their wish" and all that...then when Brance asked for candidates with more interest in the Regency he changed his tune immediately to "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme". It might have been subtle, but that was my intent.

Enoch has been Sub Rosa since (at least) Jan of 2013. I've played this character to be pleasant and inviting where people can see, but with unpleasantness underneath it all. I've been giving away details in-game, but I understand that the execution of my plan was poor. I'll be sure to wear kid-gloves more often.

Though, what percentage of self-sabotage would have been appropriate? If only 10% see it coming, is it still unacceptable? How often do you give away your plots for the sake of not hurting feelings?

[Indirik]

I tried to make it clear Enoch did not have good intentions. He laid it on thick, then never did anything. Why, when the Regency campaign begin he was all "I will serve the stars if that is their wish" and all that...then when Brance asked for candidates with more interest in the Regency he changed his tune immediately to "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme". It might have been subtle, but that was my intent.

So "I want to be Regent" is supposed to equate to "I want to destroy the church"? Especially after Brance repeatedly badgered Enoch about his intentions until Enoch finally admitted that yes, he did want to be Regent.

Enoch has been Sub Rosa since (at least) Jan of 2013.

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Some rank in a secret society of which only 5 people are aware? How is that supposed to be a mitigating factor?

Though, what percentage of self-sabotage would have been appropriate? If only 10% see it coming, is it still unacceptable? How often do you give away your plots for the sake of not hurting feelings?

That is a very valid point, to which there is no good answer. Secret plots are part of the game. I'm not saying that people shouldn't plot, and seek to overthrow their enemies. Betrayals can be the spice that makes things yummy. But when your character does a Face-Heel Turn, you should expect that there will be a high percentage of players whom you betrayed that will be very angry and hurt by what you did. The greater the magnitude of betrayal, the worse it will be. I don't understand how you could have done this without expecting that you would make a LOT of players very angry.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't have plotted the downfall of SA. That's fine. I'm not saying that you shouldn't have succeeded at destroying SA. That's fine, too. SA was rapidly heading toward the point where a diaspora was inevitable. The religion was headed toward a fracturing. It's been obvious for a couple of years that it was never going to be able to maintain the iron grip it had. The theocracies could not project their power to the south strongly enough to keep them in line. And once Luria united and became a strong, singular entity that had a strong SA presence, the splintering was inevitable.

But it's not about the end result, anyway. It's about the specific manner in which it happened. It's almost like you purposely picked the singularly most humiliating, offensive, and denigrating way in which to do it. How could yo not think that you would really piss off a lot of people?

[pcw27]

1) How many game announcements do you need to believe its not abuse?

The same number of court decisions it'll take for me to believe OJ Simpson is not a murderer.

2) Are you aware of the workings of the world around you? Yes? So are our characters. They are not dumb, and the workings of game mechanics, i.e. their world, is not unknown to them. Delvin's statements on infiltrators is a really good example.

Total nonsense. There are plenty of things about the world around me I don't have a working knowledge of. I know only the basic details of how most electronics work. I don't know the exact procedures followed by congressional budget committees. I have no idea of the chemical process to refine pure petrolium into gasoline. Everything I do know about how the world works I learned, I wasn't born knowing it.

You're claiming Jonsu should just naturally know that every single temple in all of SA would obey a decree made by the regent that he isn't even supposed to have the authority to make? HOW? How would you know that? Did you visit every last temple and talk to the staff? Did you write them all letters? Are you roleplaying that Jonsu now has severe carpal-tunnel from all that?

Here's a little scene that illustrates how Regent Enoch's decree should have been received in the vast majority of the temples of SA:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8afaQFLSTH4#t=3m00s


The only logical explanation for why this didn't happen is some sort of witchcraft, which is how most of us are playing it at this point. I'm hoping the players wont abuse OOC information and will treat this witchcraft with the same hatred we did Mendicant's "witch craft".

By the way remember when you said you'd step down when it became obvious which faction won? Is it not obvious yet? right now the vast majority of SA is supporting Helm and no one is in opposition except maybe you. All of the key lands of SA would arrest you on the spot if you tried to come near them, and even Fulco doesn't support you despite your offer to make him regent.

[Anaris]

The same number of court decisions it'll take for me to believe OJ Simpson is not a murderer.

pcw27, frankly, I find this offensive.

The question of whether OJ Simpson is or is not a murderer rests in the hard facts of the matter: Was he the person who wielded the weapon that slew his wife?

The facts of this matter are not in doubt: we know that Enoch promoted Jonsu, then demoted himself, and that Jonsu had persuaded him to do this.

What you find to be in doubt is whether that is an abuse, and that rests not in some murky unknowable territory where everyone's opinion is as valid as everyone else's, but in a relatively cut-and-dried and logical analysis of the situation.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu exploit a known bug in the game code? No.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu exploit a bug in the game code that was not previously known? No.

Did either Enoch or Jonsu break one or more of the Rules and Policies laid down by Tom? No.

Has Jonsu, in fact, done anything since gaining power that would, in and of itself (that is, ignoring the fact that it is Jonsu doing it), ruin the fun of those in SA? I don't have hard evidence on this, but I'm strongly inclined to say "No" again, because if she had, I bet I would have heard about it.

You see, pcw27, the definition of an abuse is not "some action that really upsets me or ruins my fun in the game." You have to actually define what is being abused.

I recognize that the actions taken here upset a great many people, and the dev team is, in fact, discussing what we might be able to do to prevent something like this from happening again without some clear way for the "true" faithful to kick out the pretender and get things back to whatever they consider normal. But that's a long way from saying that this was an abuse that needs to be punished.