Zuma/Daimons

[De-Legro]

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?

[Dante Silverfire]

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.

[^ban^]

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. 

[Dante Silverfire]

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.

[^ban^]

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.

[Dante Silverfire]

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.

[Valast]

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.

[Indirik]

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.

[Vellos]

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.

[Vellos]

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.

[Vellos]

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.

[Anaris]

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?

[Indirik]

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.

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.

[Sacha]

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?

[Vellos]

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.