Gambit Discussion!

[Niamh]

Staff received this note and wanted to open it up for discussion.

[ #176 ] Personal Board
A note has been posted by: <redacted>
In subject of: Concern over Gambits in general
Date : Thu May 25 20:23:04 2017
Expires : Thu Jun 15 20:23:21 2017
To : Staff
_________________________________________________________________________
Hi staff,

I have a growing concern that the ability to gambit someone that falls in
popularity will discourage people from playing hardassed -thematic-
characters such as <redacted>. I'm worried about how that may impact the game in
both the short and long term, with this sort of conflict-driving characters
discouraged from seeking positions of leadership. I'm not sure how best to
address removing GLs from their roles, but I'm not confident that the gambit
system is it.

Thanks for reading, <redacted>.

How do people feel about this?

[Rabek]

I've always been of the opinion that GLs should be made, by staff, to play thematically. If they don't (or if they're inactive), their NPC superiors remove them from office. I think that would benefit the game immensely. It's strange that these NPCs would sit by and do nothing while GLs refuse to do their jobs and/or make the organization look bad.

Also, yes. Having the Grand Inquisitor (as an example) decided by popularity contest doesn't seem particularly thematic in its own right.

[Puciek]

Maybe give more power to the nobles? In the end, in medieval times it wasn't a democracy where a horde of villagers could vote GL off the island. While big enough mass may be able to swing the vote a bit, probably backed with some rumours/moods and plenty of RP, I think that the choice should ultimately be with nobles and most influential of the gentry, and then other guild members. And right now vote of a noble is only worth 2 freemen. And even guildies are worth only 3 freemen.

So maybe scales:
8 for nobles,
5-6 for highly influential gentry
3-4 guildmates,
0-1 everyone else

Would better support hard-assed characters who can push the Freeman around as much as they want as long as they keep pleasing the influential people?

[Temi]

Nobles do have more power now than random folks off the street, though guild members are weighted more heavily. I imagine the balance could be adjusted if there were arguments for it being better for the game.

[Puciek]

Should've said, even more, power, that was worded poorly on my part. But as it is it will be very easy to overwhelm gambit support of nobles with a simple mass of Freeman. I don't know if there is data to prove or disprove this, it's merely my gut feeling that most people against a hard GL would be from the lower class and guildies.

[Starstarfish]

I've always been of the opinion that GLs should be made, by staff, to play thematically. If they don't (or if they're inactive), their NPC superiors remove them from office. I think that would benefit the game immensely. It's strange that these NPCs would sit by and do nothing while GLs refuse to do their jobs and/or make the organization look bad.

I'd arguably agree that overall people in positions of authority who don't play thematically can be really awkward for others to work around. Officially I know that staff don't comment on RP as a whole, but I might sort of argue there should be maybe some kind of policy where taking a GL position you agree to some degree to act within theme.

I don't personally think we need to give basically two of three active noble characters however the ability to influence things by making their votes count 8 times as a regular person, as that rather quickly makes everything a popularity contest. And while, yes that might be themely and historically accurate, giving two of three players the ability to completely control the game doesn't seem like a good idea.

[Niamh]

There are 10 active nobles in the game.

This information brought to you by Niamh.

[Kinaed]

Someone said something recently, can't remember where, about staff enforcing theme more (they seemed to want us to do it for them).

I have a view on this:

There are several problems with staff enforcing theme, but the primary and most deeply problematic one is simply that we're just not close enough to RP to see 90% of theme deviations happening. At absolute best, we hear about it through the eyes of someone complaining, and usually well after the fact. Even if we hear about it during the RP and swoop in to fix it, I guarantee RP would get bogged down, there'd be a lot of whinging about fairness (theme can be highly subjective, for example). Basically, it has all of the irritations that come with a policy freeze.

The only true, decent way for theme to be properly enforced is for players to embrace it at the grassroots level. That is, ironically, part of the Order's function - hammer down the nails that stand out. There are 30-odd active players on any given day on TI. There are four staff. If people want a thematic game, please look to your own RP and agree together you want a thematic game. Staff physically cannot enforce it. Together, though, you can - and ICly the act of pressuring on one another to follow Lithmorran culture is in itself highly thematic RP.

The ultimate rub of it is ... if people played far more themely on the lower level, this upper level stuff that staff actually CAN detect, but are duty bound to let people sort out on their own as part of letting players play the game (as opposed to staff playing for players), would just take care of itself.

[Rabek]

This sounds all well and good in theory, but it's never worked on TI in practice.

The society of TI is a top-down society. The upper echelons literally set the example (and enforce it) from an IC and OOC perspective. There is nothing players can do to peer pressure higher ranked individuals into acting thematically. All attempting does is risk injury or death for the low-ranked character involved (which is, in and of itself, thematic, but it doesn't address the issue.)

I don't think staff need to police all RP. I never claimed this. Just the top ranks, the people whose job it is to set precedent and provide an example to other, lower-ranked characters, because the aforementioned lower-ranked characters can't do it themselves. TI is thematically a top-down setting, and the only way to improve adherence to theme is a top-down approach because of this.

As it is right now, staff seem keen to bend theme to fit how GLs are playing, rather than the other way around, and this is distressingly backwards and counter-productive, in my opinion.

[Starstarfish]

I'd say one thing with Gambits would be considering requiring people make clear whom is saying something - IE offering their name. With something as important as a Gambit, it seems like the ability to speak with the person in question and IC politick etc given that votes can change would be a big boost to RP potential. It would also ensure that people making comments on Gambits were saying things their PCs are personally aware of and can RP about/comment on if asked about ICly.

If people want a thematic game, please look to your own RP and agree together you want a thematic game.

That is, ironically, part of the Order's function - hammer down the nails that stand out.

The difficulty sometimes is that the people who lose out the most when other people don't act themely often have the least if any IC power to actually influence those things through their own RP. And folks that do have that IC power and try to utilize it are seen by others as being "party poopers" for "ruining people's fun" when they try ICly to enforce things. It's been brought up at OOC meetings that some players want staff to stop telling others to enforce theme or serve that function if it leads to unpleasant RP.

Enforcement of theme can and does at times seem to be become a bit of a popularity contest. IE - how much it seems to bother people about unthemely behaviour seems to be related at times to how popular the character and/or player is. Which is a very difficult thing for other people to try and fix. Despite staff having mentioned at OOC meetings about some opinions etc are themely, I personally have been called out by other players over tells and Guild channels and asked why I have them. And I don't think necessarily there was poor intent on the part of some people involved, but - it can make feeling like bothering will be more difficulty than it's worth.

IE - that being a person willing to enforce theme at times risks your own stance and popularity with others to the risk of your characters and enjoyment of the game.

And I'm not saying that people aren't and shouldn't be willing to do that for the "Greater Good" but sometimes it can feel a very difficult road to walk.