ti-legacy.com

Hi Players,

Lately, I've gotten a bit of pressure from various parties to take a stronger stance on enforcing theme, and we took a poll where players generally indicated they want more theme-enforcement from staff.

A lot of you have played on other RP muds. I don't want to enforce things to the extent that staff are running the game, constantly judging people's RP and meddling a lot shouting 'unthematic!' whenever we don't agree with any player's action, but equally I acknowledge that we probably need to do more than sit on our laurels and bite our nails when we see certain people ignoring fundamental built-in theme conflicts and subverting the purpose of, say, an entire guild.

So, let's say that we want a dark, gritty medieval theme for TI. Looking at situations you've encountered, what would you like to see staff doing? What do you want to see staff avoid doing like the plague?

Should we create any systems to support theme? Get creative, we can code almost anything.

Thanks in advance for your assistance with this query, you're helping us form policy, and that is important.

45 views and no thoughts or opinions...?

Thing is, when that poll was around, I voted, can't remember the exact wording, but that Staff's enforcement of theme was just the right amount. As such despite viewing this, I can't really add anything unless I pulled something out of my behind,

I mean if anything, mobs that react to classes or races. Like if a charali is wandering around the Vavardian quarter, they may receive some harsh words.

*Shrugs*

I'm also generally content with the level of staff 'touch' on such matters.

If those that have raised issue with it (or staff) could pose concrete examples (real or just made up) of where they think staff should have stepped in, it may provide a launching point for this discussion?

If you want a darker, grittier theme as suggested above (and as I'd certainly personally prefer), I'd say that you'd probably best start off with revising some elements of the current theme to encourage it. I could provide a list, but it may be rather tangential from the main thrust of this thread.

I think mostly my thoughts on this one have been veto'd before, but:

* Add code to support stricter requirements for class - the asset system and changeable class as very high staff priorities
* Expand applications so that bastards also require application at a minimum - ideally, require brief applications for all PCs to weed out deeply unthematic concepts. This, along with the prior point, would help solve the problem with gentry concepts that do not feel gentry, which is imo the #1 thematic problem of the game.
* More stringent policing of rumors that are pretty much explicitly heretical or don't seem to understand TI's class system
* Require basic knowledge tests of people applying as GLs and Inquisitors

At full disclosure I'm one of those asking — imploring, even! — for a stauncher enforcement of a harsher theme. This might very well be (as I've mentioned before in conversation with Kinaed) that I expect something different than the premise of what The Inquisition: Legacy is supposed to be. But, in my mind the game world is supposed to be set in a world of struggles and one of conflicts and too often I do feel that those struggles and conflicts happen in spite of the game world and the policy of staff; by 'policy' I mean the rules, the code, and the expectations/actions of staff in the IC world.

I'll try to be succint: it's something I'm often very horrible at.

Staff Enforcement of Theme should be in generalities and rarely in specifics. I don't think any of us want to get a tell from Temi informing us that the scene we've just been part of that we really enjoyed was improper. When I think of how Staff can enforce theme it's to write (or code!) things that express motifs of the theme in a way that players simply cannot by accident ignore. This can be in the way of writing more thematic descriptions either of rooms or of NPCs (or making those descriptions stand out a bit more?), running STs and Plotlines to draw attention to particular motifs (this takes, probably, more effort than everything else combined), writing IC_Events or random Rumors about things going on where players can't or aren't looking, and even something as mundane as waltzing into a bar and having a drunk peasant start a fistfight. I am -firmly- opposed, as I think most of us are, about Staff telling us that our RP is 'wrong' except in the most extreme cases (The one time I can bring to mind is when someone wanted to play a scientist and was told flatly 'no' to the idea of 'discoveries'.) — a recent conversation with Staff on this topic gave me a good quote to use: "Staff should RP what people aren't."

However, I do think that social classes should be given many more variances. Right now, the differences in playing freemen and gentry feels mostly just a matter of how much money you get during the weekly update; there is almost no other benefit except those that players decide they (or others) get. The only real difference I can think of is that gentry have a bit more protection with their homes than freemen do.. but nobody really explains 'why'. In my mind, this is because Freemen don't -own- their own property; all of that is simply on lease to them by the nobility and royalty. You don't 'own' that house in the city or that farm in the country, you simply manage it for the King and Queen... which means that if you start being less-than-worthwhile to them, that privledge can and will be yanked out from underneath you. At the same time, ideas like burgalry of a Freeman's house should be laughed away; in fact, I'd rather like it if Freemen had virtually no rights in the eyes of the Law. They're replaceable, disposable. If Freemen kill each other, who cares, so long as the general social order isn't threatened. The Law exists to keep power concentrated in the hands of those who possess that power; religion is there to keep the common folk safe and feeling protected by something. There's a lot of small ideas to code-wise enforce the theme in this regards that I won't list off here! (And, again, I don't think it'd be good to force players to treat others with hostility or anything like that. But it should be a bit more of the backdrop of the world, shouldn't it? An understanding that being Freeman, Gentry, or Nobility really -means- something that wildly, wildly differs between each of the classes. I'd also like to voice the idea of a coded 'Clergy' social class, since dedicated members of the Church have vastly different social rights and responsibilities from their other economic/legal standing!)

Finally, I think there do need to be more avenues for players to affect each other in negative ways. There should be more risk, I think. More opportunity for screwing someone over. This comes in a vast myriad of ways -- I don't JUST mean with things like stealing or breaking and entering or mage, though these all could, I think, be honed to sharper edges -- but in the more legal avenues of social regard and status. 'Support' feels toothless, really, and I do think there are ways that could be smoothly incorporated into the game.

As for things to avoid like the plague? Please, avoid plague like the plague. Really, 'THE WHOLE CITY IS SICK!!' storylines are boring.

Dice wrote:* Expand applications so that bastards also require application at a minimum - ideally, require brief applications for all PCs to weed out deeply unthematic concepts. This, along with the prior point, would help solve the problem with gentry concepts that do not feel gentry, which is imo the #1 thematic problem of the game.
* More stringent policing of rumors that are pretty much explicitly heretical or don't seem to understand TI's class system

I like both of these a lot. I -hate- hearing heretical ideas passed around via Rumor — people should be saying them if they want them to be heard, not leaving it for rumor.

Back when the vote happened I was in favor of the theme being more rigidly enforced, but that was 90% because of a now banned player's character. As of right now I'm dealing with a debate with myself regarding this exact same topic, so I'll be looking in on the thread often.

I'm down with most of this, Dragon (and most of what Dice said, excepting knowledge tests which I think is a bit stringent for me). What you're suggesting seems to be more in the realm of 'back end' changes, rather than interference, and thus less 'theme enforcement' and more... theme cultivation, setting the stage to foster the theme and allow it to develop and be explored along different ways.

I'm content to see a stronger differentiation between social classes as it is in line with my personal preference towards a harsher setting. A few suggestions:
- Limit certain guild ranks. Freeman masters, knights, magistrates, bishops? Pfft. No. Allow nobles and gentry to enter 'old boy' guilds at a midrank in exchange for a 'donation'.
- Less rights for freemen? Seems reasonable to me, given the era we're in and the suppressive nature of church and government.
- To go along with above, remove the thematic 'universal eduation' (I think the Order is incentivised to keep the people poorly educated and at the mercy of the literate clergy and nobility), introduce slavery to Lithmore and other such things to make it feel more medieval and less modern.
- I'd probably be inclined to hack out the laws of Charity and Caring as I think they encourage too much fluffiness.

I'm sure I could list more if I sat down to compose a thorough list.

There is a serf class that exists below Freemen. As I understand it, serfs are exactly what's being discussed - people who are absolutely boned and 100% obedient to even a gentry's desires, and live off some meager allowance given to them by their lord. Freemen are those who have distinguished themselves in some way from the serfs - all player characters are Freemen, not because they're the lowest class, but because they're the lowest class that can be considered quote unquote "citizens". The Freemen are listened to out of pity, while the serfs are nearly forgotten entirely.

And honestly, the knowledge tests might not be a bad idea. I've been playing Renton Feland, who happens to have moved up to the position of Grand Inquisitor. Now I've been getting by, but when I first started playing him as an Application Inquisitor, I'd only had a lay understanding of how the religion worked. I was expecting to have some time as a "regular" Inquisitor to get some good OOC understanding of the specifics, but in the circumstances that just ended up not being the case. If there were a short quiz or something, or perhaps some sort of interview to determine how deeply the player's OOC knowledge of Davism went, I probably would have had more incentive to study things. As is, I've been so busy with OOC life stuff and IC duties that I've had hardly any time to actually learn.

The only problem is that people don't really want to be Inquisitors already, and adding further hoops to jump through makes it even less likely to get new blood. But that in itself might not be terrible, if it means people will want to grow through the ranks and become an Inquisitor entirely ICly. It's a difficult path, but one that will likely leave you much more prepared for it.

As for knowledge tests for GLs, I think that would be extremely helpful! The Guildleader channel has been excellent in helping me with the nitty gritty code stuff, but being a guild leader is hard as balls if I'm going to be frank. If there were perhaps some kind of room you could be dumped into upon creating an Application GL with a bunch of OOC and IC literature on, more or less, how to do your job... that would be a great help.

As for the themes of Charity and Caring, I think those are extremely important. It means that proper Lithmorrans have good reason to go poking into other people's business, which helps greatly with RP. Other than that, I've mostly been using them for the few times where my Inquisitor doesn't need to have his fangs out. It's hard to be "on" all the time as an Inquisitor, and Charity and Caring give you a very good reason to have some off time chatting with folks. It's less a matter of wanting to be fluffy and more that it gives my character more avenues of development that aren't torturing the hell out of a dude - not that torturing dudes isn't interesting, but sometimes you want some variety and when you're a GL your alts tend to fall by the wayside.

Note: The following information might illuminate too much about my actions ICly for comfort - if you'd rather remain in the dark, stop reading here. I don't know if I'm violating a rule or something, feel free to edit it if I am.

In regard to the general complaint about theme not being harsh enough - I certainly hope I'm not contributing to that. I've been doing my best to make Inquisitors seem properly frightening - while still giving myself allowance to make various little IC mistakes that I think are more interesting. The only thing I've been having trouble with is the idea of "Oh you're up for Review? You're boned". That's mostly because I'm really a fairly soft hearted guy OOC, and I often have very little idea of how the RP has gone for folks up to the point where they're captured by me. If they've had a very good time then I feel pretty much A-OK with burning them since they got something out of it, but you don't really want to go around asking people OOCly "hey did you have fun? cause then I won't be sad about burning and killing you.!" and then having that effect my IC actions.

Really it's a fairly awkward situation, having to burn a dude. Maybe I just have to harden my heart a bit, but it's surprisingly tough to be the guy at the top. When you don't see the whole story, it can be hard to determine whether or not someone's gotten enough out of their character to be okay with letting them go - and it worries me that I might be weakening the theme by having too much OOC compassion. What do people think? In the time since Renton's hit the head of the Inquisition, there's been plenty of mistakes - but do they seem unthematic, or simply what one would expect out of a 26 year old, newly minted Grand Inquisitor? It's a thin line to straddle - and one would think I'd stop playing these types of characters considering how much I ask for OOC input on how I'm doing, but I can't help it that they're so fun to play. Just a little bit anxiety inducing as well.