Sanguis Astroism

[Anaris]

Didn't Tom have to adjust how the whole judge ban thing works because of that abuse?

I don't believe so. There haven't been any major changes to how bans work (IIRC) in quite a long time.

[pcw27]

Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.

But those who have been outplayed should have a recourse shouldn't they? If you make a madman your king and he starts to destroy the realm you can rebel against him.

[Gustav Kuriga]

But those who have been outplayed should have a recourse shouldn't they? If you make a madman your king and he starts to destroy the realm you can rebel against him.

Not if he appoints a judge that bans you first. Which is possible, depending on your government type, I believe.

[De-Legro]

This is the first time I have heard this stated as more than speculation of a click war (or at least, that's what it sounded like to me on previous mentions).

I think that there may be a legitimate case to be made that this part of the whole thing was an abuse. If you believe that to be the case, then please make a Titan report.

Unfortunately, I do not believe there is any way the code can prevent something like this from happening. If there had been a "guild ban" feature applied to Jonsu, or there were limits in place to prevent her from joining and rejoining within a short period of time, all Justin would have needed to do is make sure that he and Enoch's player were online at the same time, so that Enoch could remove the ban, Jonsu could join, and Enoch could promote her.

Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.

So long as Elders have the power to act indepently there is nothing that can be done. If a religion is able to configure itself so that things like promotions require a vote, or the approval of x number of elders you could prevent it, but we are talking significant changes to the way things operate.

Unless religions are changed from a dictatorship model, the highest rank will probably always override protections, since it is assumed that they are in control of placing those protections.

[pcw27]

Not if he appoints a judge that bans you first. Which is possible, depending on your government type, I believe.

But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

On top of that if your realm has multiple duchies dukes can secede and regions can change loyalty to the new realm. Then that realm can declare war on the original, oust the mad king and his judge and rename the realm back to its original name.

[De-Legro]

But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

On top of that if your realm has multiple duchies dukes can secede and regions can change loyalty to the new realm. Then that realm can declare war on the original, oust the mad king and his judge and rename the realm back to its original name.

Like Tim said, realms tend to have more safeguards because they are viewed as the most important grouping. But they are not immune. What if you are a single duchy realm, the one in question was on FEI. What if nearly every noble is away on a war so Lords and Dukes are too far away to take much action?

Of course once you have banned almost everyone then what, you potentially don't have the nobles to even have a Lord for every region, but if your goal is to destroy or severely hurt the realm what do you care? Even if you have a structure that can split off and fight against the mad King, if you already have conflicts going, and those opponents decide to press the advantage what then?

[Gustav Kuriga]

But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

On top of that if your realm has multiple duchies dukes can secede and regions can change loyalty to the new realm. Then that realm can declare war on the original, oust the mad king and his judge and rename the realm back to its original name.

Now we are just getting into hypotheticals. Please stick to the tangibles.

[Anaris]

But then you need a judge that also wants to destroy the realm. Underground membership is secret so he has to ban everyone. It takes three days for the ban to take effect, which potentially gives you enough time to lead a successful rebellion.

Except that you can't join the underground when you're banned.

Plus, what Gustav Kuriga said.

[OFaolain]

So long as Elders have the power to act indepently there is nothing that can be done. If a religion is able to configure itself so that things like promotions require a vote, or the approval of x number of elders you could prevent it, but we are talking significant changes to the way things operate.

Unless religions are changed from a dictatorship model, the highest rank will probably always override protections, since it is assumed that they are in control of placing those protections.

Would it be difficult to add a "cast time" (since I'm blanking on a better phrase) to rank changes, or a protest feature to religions/guilds?  If promotions/demotions/ejections happened at (for instance) turn change the turn *after* they're performed (or X changes, whatever you wanted for the delay) and elders could be protested out of their positions I feel like that would at least give some sort of recourse if someone were to hijack your guild/religion.  Jonsu takes over, starts kicking and demoting people, 80% of SA protests and she loses her eldership, the ejections take effect and then everyone comes back and the religion restoration mechanic kicks in (I have no idea, by the way, what that entails or if it would be in any way beneficial).

In SA news, so far very few people have voiced open support of Jonsu (even her Regent IIRC declined the offer) so I don't really know what's going to happen.  Is she getting backroom support?

[dustole]

One thing I found a bit odd was how Jonsu re-joined the religion. Well and good. But she had been excommunicated and convicted of heresy, so one of the Elders on at the time kicked her out.

She came back.

A different Elder (me I think) kicked her out again.

She came back again.

Then Enoch promoted her, demoted himself, and that was it. So basically this all hinged on whether players were online at the time to kick her out again, whether she was on again to rejoin again, and who would be exhausted or unlucky enough first. I'm pretty sure none of that is "gameplay mechanics as they were intended."

2014-02-02 21:41:42   Hireshmont II Vellos, Coffermaster of Phantaria, Baron of Mistight has enlarged the temple in Mistight. It is now a small temple.
2014-02-02 23:57:25   Luminary Machiavel has removed Jonsu from the order and revoked her membership in the order.
2014-02-03 00:22:29   Regent of the Faith Enoch has promoted Jonsu to the rank of Guardian of the Temple. Jonsu is now a full member of the order.
2014-02-03 00:27:33   Regent of the Faith Enoch has demoted Turin to the rank of Knight Penitent. Turin is no longer a senior member of the order.
2014-02-03 00:27:50   Regent of the Faith Enoch has promoted Jonsu to the rank of Regent of the Faith. Jonsu is now a senior member of the order.
2014-02-03 00:28:58   Regent of the Faith Enoch has demoted Enoch to the rank of Special Regent Representative.
2014-02-03 00:29:53   Light of the Austere Star Rabisu has removed Enoch from the order and revoked his membership in the order.
2014-02-03 00:32:02   Regent of the Faith Jonsu has demoted Rabisu to the rank of Knight Penitent. Rabisu is no longer a senior member of the order.




She wasn't kicked out of the church  during her attempt to take control.

[dustole]

But those who have been outplayed should have a recourse shouldn't they? If you make a madman your king and he starts to destroy the realm you can rebel against him.

Recourse you say...   I think we have already discussed it.   You didn't like it.   At this point I'm willing to say:   Tough.         


Jonsu took control and beat us all.  I was taken completely off guard as was virtually everyone else.   Jonsu won... the church is hers.    Justin was gracious enough to give you guys a chance to fight back and defeat Jonsu.    I'm not sure I would have done the same if one of my characters took control of the church.   

[Dishman]

Unless religions are changed from a dictatorship model, the highest rank will probably always override protections, since it is assumed that they are in control of placing those protections.

I don't understand the emphasis on mechanics over RP. The mechanics aid to give us guidelines and rules to play agreeably with, but RP is the GAME. If the game cannot give us a schism, why not create one ourselves? Didn't Jonsu offer to promote factions for a schism? If we continue to play as friends, then we can get all the good stuff we want the devs to do (while they are busy with more important work). Did Jonsu threaten to destroy the church, or did Justin? Either way, it was likely a bluff. We made an OOC agreements on how this would go. Jonsu may be a bitch, but Justin has been around a while. If he wasn't 'playing with friends' he would likely have been deleted by now.

Does everyone really dislike and distrust Stabbity that much? Or are their characters so butt-hurt by Jonsu that it has become OOC? Is there a better indication for "who seems like a player worth trusting" than all those damned trust medals?

[Daycryn]

This is the first time I have heard this stated as more than speculation of a click war (or at least, that's what it sounded like to me on previous mentions).

I think that there may be a legitimate case to be made that this part of the whole thing was an abuse. If you believe that to be the case, then please make a Titan report.

Unfortunately, I do not believe there is any way the code can prevent something like this from happening. If there had been a "guild ban" feature applied to Jonsu, or there were limits in place to prevent her from joining and rejoining within a short period of time, all Justin would have needed to do is make sure that he and Enoch's player were online at the same time, so that Enoch could remove the ban, Jonsu could join, and Enoch could promote her.

Once you have handed over the highest position in a guild to someone with a desire to harm it, not only do I not believe there is anything the game can do to prevent damage entirely, I do not think there is anything it should do. That's what's called "getting outplayed." Yeah, it sucks when it happens. I've been outplayed a time or two myself, and I was really upset. But that doesn't mean that anything the people who outplayed me did was wrong, or against any kind of rule.

I'm not interested in appealing to Titans or Magistrates or anything else at this point, personally.

As for the latter point, fine enough, it's not against a rule, never said it was - but - "Outplayed?"  Seems to me playing well should create fun in the game. Roleplaying should happen. I mean in the one RP Enoch sent out mentioned him being all kinds of corrupt, and if that had actually happened - roleplays previously indicating that - then it wouldn't seem like a cheap play. It would have been an interesting story. People could have gotten into it. Players could have been involved. Things would have turned out the same but it would have been less "controversial" and a lot more interesting for a lot more people. I mean what we coulda had there is basically a Mad King scenario, but it wound up being utterly wasted. Referenced after the fact.  I don't consider that how the game should be played, let alone an example of the game being played so well that everyone else just, I guess, sucks in comparison?

[De-Legro]

I don't understand the emphasis on mechanics over RP. The mechanics aid to give us guidelines and rules to play agreeably with, but RP is the GAME. If the game cannot give us a schism, why not create one ourselves? Didn't Jonsu offer to promote factions for a schism? If we continue to play as friends, then we can get all the good stuff we want the devs to do (while they are busy with more important work). Did Jonsu threaten to destroy the church, or did Justin? Either way, it was likely a bluff. We made an OOC agreements on how this would go. Jonsu may be a bitch, but Justin has been around a while. If he wasn't 'playing with friends' he would likely have been deleted by now.

Does everyone really dislike and distrust Stabbity that much? Or are their characters so butt-hurt by Jonsu that it has become OOC? Is there a better indication for "who seems like a player worth trusting" than all those damned trust medals?

I think it is obvious that Justin is a polarising player. As is obvious he has many Fun and Trust medals, yet there is definitely a large group of players that don't trust him.

In terms of mechanics trumping RP, so far as I know the rule exist for exactly issues like this. It simplifies things for those that need to make ruling since they can just refer to the mechanics and not have to try and access masses of RP's, many of which may no longer be accessible in order to determine if someone's actions run counter to established RP. Then try and decide did that player have access to the RP or would be aware of the systems etc.

It is not a rule that says you can't use RP to achieve things that the mechanics don't specifically support. It exists to allow disagreements to be resolved in those cases. As soon as you move into RP structures, you open the system to risk from people that will use the mechanics to upset it, as we have seen with the charter.

[De-Legro]

I'm not interested in appealing to Titans or Magistrates or anything else at this point, personally.

As for the latter point, fine enough, it's not against a rule, never said it was - but - "Outplayed?"  Seems to me playing well should create fun in the game. Roleplaying should happen. I mean in the one RP Enoch sent out mentioned him being all kinds of corrupt, and if that had actually happened - roleplays previously indicating that - then it wouldn't seem like a cheap play. It would have been an interesting story. People could have gotten into it. Players could have been involved. Things would have turned out the same but it would have been less "controversial" and a lot more interesting for a lot more people. I mean what we coulda had there is basically a Mad King scenario, but it wound up being utterly wasted. Referenced after the fact.  I don't consider that how the game should be played, let alone an example of the game being played so well that everyone else just, I guess, sucks in comparison?

Fun is subjective. If my realm kills yours, it is fair to say they we are probably having fun, and you are likely not. RP's are subjective, we do not force everyone to write them, we do not force people that do choose to write them to share them in specific message groups. I myself hardly ever RP any more, I prefer the RP of my characters to be evident in their interactions with others. That obviously means that those I interact with more have a greater handle on the personality of the character.

I have mentioned previously that when I plot, I try to set things up so people can counter it. I can guarantee I don't always get it right. It is so difficult to guess what clues people have picked up on and I do not intend to make it so obvious I never succeed. It is clear that Dishman intended the same. Perhaps he was too subtle and too many people missed the clues, like I said it is not a easy balance to strike.

I can't see us punishing people for not writing RP messages. It is not a compulsory part of the game. I can't see us making a rule that says if 90% of the players affected don't find it fun we should step in either.