RANT: Theme, Nobility, Religion and Overall "scariness."

[Kinaed]

Wow, I had no idea things were like this on the ground.

And unfortunately, it seriously is a social problem amongst the pbase the staff can't really fix or enforce. I mean, we can't make that guy chop off your hand. We can't force Inquisitors to haul people in for questioning if they don't Chalice at the mention of a mage or laugh at the appearance of a shadow. My goodness.

I'd really like to see some of these old players who -know- what the scary is supposed to be doing their thing - and seriously, be good to each other when you see someone enforcing theme or playing a thematic, hard-to-take-with-modern-sensibilities character.

Is there anything that the staff CAN do that wouldn't be overstepping our bounds? Give people a command like turns 'theme' to provide a theme warning (as a form of head's up and apology) to request people react in-theme? Something like:

theme
[Theme] Kinaed warns that her next action is based out of intention of thematic play.

It might make people feel easier and also remind people in the room to go easier on someone if they're doing their theme "duty" so to speak.

I also wonder if maybe using that flag might give the room an XP bonus for thematic RP, but I'm not sure what would keep people from just abusing the hell out of that. Thoughts?

[Leech]

Twatting about at work, but from the get-go I'm not too fond of it. Will post more later, but generally I don't think it'll do much aside from providing more ooc gibberish to block out.

[Dice]

Staff can be absolutely sure to scrutinize noble applications closely, and reject those that indicate they won't play strongly to the theme. Like it or not, nobles DO end up being the arbiter of theme - if we have nobles that let people call them by their first name in public and won't treat disrespect harshly, things fall apart.

Beyond that, though... it's really, honestly, not easy and I'm not sure I've got anything.

[Leech]

Alright! Now that I have a keyboard at my fingers again...

Completely agree with Dice here. I don't think any new code is needed, but stricter application guidelines for nobles, inquisitors, GLs, etc would be nice. They really are the people who enforce theme, and we have some really good thematic characters on grid right now. If we have complaints like this though, I think it's just a matter of getting -more-.

[wimple]

Late to the party, but I'd really hate for "scariness" in game to start becoming people being penalized for OOC reasons. Not at mass, so you automatically get reviewed? What if I had my alt there or I hate large-scale scenes?

IMHO, we had a period where people would just flat out get killed for lots of associations, so there were problems with the Reeves and the Order. That was addressed with the Reeves, but was never really addressed with the Order. We've swung the other way now, to where it's perhaps too permissive. But being a true Orderite doesn't mean that everyone would be dragged to the pyre for casual heresy. There are a slew of other penances that can make up for those things, many of which can be fantastic for RP, and scary, too. The Order should be scary, IMHO, because they know everything about everyone, not necessarily because they're going to kill everyone - they kill mages, not your average joe smcho.

As for why there are less scary Orderites being played... I've played Orderites before. I had a lot of fun in the priest route. I had fun being 100% Orderite. Checking people's backgrounds, giving them punishments, taking confessions, etc, was fun. But I eventually left because there weren't Inquisitors. I'm willing to play bigoted or backwards, but I don't want to spend my RP time in a position where the majority of my RP revolves around scenes where I am torturing people. I'd be fine if I could FTB in those situations, but since that's where you're finding things out, and since most of the collars we got WANTED those scenes.... I noped right out of there. I don't see myself making an Orderite again, because I don't want to get forced into that again.

I don't know about the rest of the player base, but I don't necessarily know if the issue with Orderites is that people want to have too "modern" a view - I was happy having a backwards non-modern view. I think some of the issue might be the actual RP it entails. I'm not going to spend my hour or two a week in RP scenes where I'm trying to come up with ways to pull people's nails off. Just ain't my thing. And since just about every Inquisitor we've had has been some kind of crazy, I'm starting to wonder if no one knows how to play that role as someone who is sane and in with the times.

[Geras]

I'm willing to play bigoted or backwards, but I don't want to spend my RP time in a position where the majority of my RP revolves around scenes where I am torturing people. I'd be fine if I could FTB in those situations, but since that's where you're finding things out, and since most of the collars we got WANTED those scenes.... I noped right out of there.

It's settled then. We need to recruit more sadists to come play TI. :p

I think part of the issue here actually has to do with the demographics of the players. For myself at least, as I've grown up I've found myself seeing the world less and less in terms of black and white and more and more in shades of gray. I don't think very many people see themselves as villains, and I feel like more characters are likely to reflect that now than they were in the past. That's not always a bad thing either. Some of the best villains we've had have been ones that were equal parts tragic hero (Naer for example).

[Onyxsoulle]

I agree that things have gotten a bit passive. My trouble(as a player that has a toon that is both a noble and an Orderite) has been finding an appropriate reason for being 'that guy' thematically.

Bit of a history here, Arynon was gentry, when his sister was killed, he gained his Barony. Didn't app or anything, it was just 'Bam! You're a Noble!'. Not complaining about that, it was a good way for me to learn what to do as a Noble. But I reached a point where I realized that Arynon was WAY too nice. For a time he did in fact suggest to people to use his first name, would let things slide. But, it seemed thematic, gentry made Noble, learning the ways of the Court, it mirrored my own learning. But I couldn't figure out a way to get Arynon out of his 'nice' rut.

Then stuff happened. Now I'm slowly pulling Arynon out of that rut, he's getting less tolerant of 'them uppity commoners'. Hence( if anyone noticed) at the debate, he actually threatened someone with his wolves.

Now, I'm only letting people know this because some of us(like Voxumo and myself) are new to being a Noble, we're learning, and eventually we'll get to the point of people making sure they bow after each pose to make sure they covered all of their bases, but it's still alot to learn. Alot of times we want to play the 'nice but don't piss me off character'. One that I think has mastered this is Ariel, you can joke with him icly over and over and over, but say the wrong thing about a Noble, and he asks to talk to you next to that pool of Lye.

Order: I have no idea about this. Arynon has recently gotten to the point where he's a bit beastly if he needs to play the Knight card. But a big problem I've seen is that no one seems to want to watch the lines, everyone wants in on the rp. I understand people wanting to rp, be part of the action and etc, but sometimes it's just not thematic.

Case in point: The Demon attack on the Salon(i know this is a bit dated, but still). The one thing that confused me was the number of non-knights that were involved. Thematically, no reeves or commoners should have been in the building. Reeves outside keeping people out, sure, but not inside with the demon and mage. That should have been Knights and Inquisitor/priests only. I am not saying that it wasn't fun rp, just that it's hard to hold to theme if no one else is.

I am also not saying we don't need 'that guy', the one that doesn't care(icly) what the laws are, they still do what they want, help where they want, etc etc. What I am saying is that we don't need EVERY person being 'that guy'.

*looks up* I may have strayed a bit from the topic, but I think it still applies.

[Bennie]

I cannot speak for nobility. I've never played one (though I'd, of course, be open to the adventure). However, I can speak for Orderites and some of the stuff surrounding playing a clergyman in theme, from both OOC and IC levels, and some of the general (sometimes conflicting goals) I see for clerics and the Church at wide. This might stray a bit from what we've been talking about, but I hope this might be enlightening/informative/interesting to people who have concerns invested in how well Orderites are being played and what RP paths can lead to balanced clergyman characters.

To start off, I have been guilty of being too nice. Benedictus was ultimately a little lax on a lot of things, and for those old codgers about, you will remember the direct results of some of that laxity (*cough*the fall*cough*). However, moving from Benedictus into some of my 'middle' period Order characters and now into Iain, my next 'big' Order character, I've identified what I see as the two major, sometimes conflicting, goals of what the Church should be. These are:
1) The defenders of public morals/traditions and spiritual health
2) The egalitarian shepherds of the people of the Kingdom, for the ingame Order, the city of Lithmore.

Point 1 is where the 'scary' most notably comes in. The Church, knights included, have the singular job of making sure everyone in the city and in the Kingdom are being fostered on their path to holiness and that the general norms of Lithmorran society and the doctrines of Davite spiritual life are being maintained. They support the divine right of the nobility and the Kings to rule, the oppose magic with a passion, they work to root out false (heretical) opinions among the player bases and to suppress those who spread dissent from the traditional doctrines of Davite society. For Point 1, I have often used two sub-motivations as my guiding lights: The Church believes that sin ultimately harms the sinner and those around the sinner, and the Church believes in the general stability of Dav's Kingdom, beyond the individual political goals of this noble or that. They are interested in seeing society survive. This does not mean they are utterly against innovation or 'progress,' more that they are naturally wary of it and will desire significant justification to alter how things have worked. In promoting this, Davites should be strict. I think where a lot of the laxity comes in is the idea of mercy which is often associated with religion. Mercy, in many people's minds, is about letting things go, taking the route that involves the least pain for someone at your power, in a sense, being lax. I'd counter by saying in many cases, true mercy (especially for an Orderite), means allowing second chances and encouraging change for the better as opposed to purely punitive or vindictive measures. In this sense, just 'letting it go' doesn't actually mean mercy it all, it means you are being weak when you have a responsibility to help a person along. Mercy, instead, means being quick and sure about the punishment and then happily accepting reform afterwards, not holding a grudge. People should know that when they do something the Order perceives as being harmful (they do drugs, have extramarital sex, indulge heresy, perform magery), that there are going to be punishments involved, but that the end result of those punishments is a chance at new life, that the purpose of the punishment is to 'wake you up' and encourage you to live anew.

Point 2 goes a bit of a different direction. In a sense, I have always been a little Christian in how I view the mission of Davite bishops. I see Davite bishops as having an ultimate responsibility for the people of the area they are assigned. And by the people, I mean -all- the people. Everyone from the richest, most influential noble to the poorest bum; from the most glowing and devout Davite to the nasty heretic mage. The responsibility the bishop has to these people is to ensure that each one is given what he needs to live, is allowed the chances at a happy devout life in accord with his station, that they are given justice, and the attention of the Church. The priests of a given province are an extension of that care. How I see this playing out is that the Church should strive to be equally receptive of the concerns of the Southside poor as the Northside nobility. The Church should possess some distance from the secular law (not necessarily from secular governing) in being willing to grant Sanctuary to the unjustly accused or the cruelly convicted. Everyone should be comfortable approaching the Church for the help they need and should feel some sort of filial love for the Davite Church. Sure, it can be big and scary, sure it demands my respect, but in the end, I know it cares for me, and it cares for me in a way which is different and more equal than how my noble or the reeves care for me.

These interact much in how I see the tension of the Law of Caring interact. Nobles are nobility, have special rights, there are laws, they must be enforced -but- in the end, these things must return to the care of the people and to ensure they are being treated well. I don't deny it is a difficult tension, but I think it is one the Church ought to embrace, in game. I hope to see the Church become a lot less one-way-or-the-other. Either being super, super strict and scary or being loving, gentle, and totally lax. The balance is where we should be.

[Onyxsoulle]

Bennie's post sparked my memory about a circumstance that happened icly, but I think was an example of Orderites being way too lax (Arynon was a bit lax on the situation, but he didn't start out lax, he actually confronted the person in question, called them a heretic, said they were damned, etc etc).

I can't remember the name, but it was the female Inquisitor that wound up quitting the Church (with the Cardinal's approval) after getting pregnant.

Personally I think the Order was lax on this topic. You had an Inquisitor that had taken her oaths, gave herself to the Order and the Lord of the Springs, was a trusted representative of the Church, and charged with bringing heretics and mages to 'the light'.

So she broke every vow she made, got knocked up, and then (in my opinion) was barely smacked on the hand and let go(then the player had them die in childbirth).

Personally I think the Order should have been much harsher on her. If a 'norm' does the same thing, yes, smack their hand, say don't do it again, 5000 Hail Davies.

But she was an Inquisitor. To me that was the equivalent of switching sides during a war. The character(icly, not oocly, because sometimes the player just doesn't know) would know that she was breaking oaths, and would probably wind up in the Abyss.

Just an opinion on this, don't burn me at the pyre!!!!

[Voxumo]

Bennie's post sparked my memory about a circumstance that happened icly, but I think was an example of Orderites being way too lax (Arynon was a bit lax on the situation, but he didn't start out lax, he actually confronted the person in question, called them a heretic, said they were damned, etc etc).

I can't remember the name, but it was the female Inquisitor that wound up quitting the Church (with the Cardinal's approval) after getting pregnant.

Personally I think the Order was lax on this topic. You had an Inquisitor that had taken her oaths, gave herself to the Order and the Lord of the Springs, was a trusted representative of the Church, and charged with bringing heretics and mages to 'the light'.

So she broke every vow she made, got knocked up, and then (in my opinion) was barely smacked on the hand and let go(then the player had them die in childbirth).

Personally I think the Order should have been much harsher on her. If a 'norm' does the same thing, yes, smack their hand, say don't do it again, 5000 Hail Davies.

But she was an Inquisitor. To me that was the equivalent of switching sides during a war. The character(icly, not oocly, because sometimes the player just doesn't know) would know that she was breaking oaths, and would probably wind up in the Abyss.

Just an opinion on this, don't burn me at the pyre!!!!

You only know about the outside story. Icly Meranda (The inquisitor you are referring to) and tristana were suppose to be branded heretics after the child was born. They were also suppose to spend a certain amount of time being retrained in the ways of the church. Trust me there was more going on in the background besides a slap on the wrist.