Temi queries, "Does anyone else besides Rothgar have topics to get on the list for this week?"
Empena says, "I have a short thought."
Temi nods.
Temi muses, "Okay. Anyone else?"
Safir claims, "Not that I know of yet."
Temi claims, "Okay, going ahead and getting started."
Temi exclaims, "For staff updates, not a whole lot out of the ordinary for me.. normal plots and RPAs sort of things, but not even too much of that. We did go over some staff talking points last night... which kept me up too late so I'm still tired today, but anyway!"
Temi claims, "No current active projects, so we'll see what comes up."
Temi asks, "Az?"
Azarial claims, "Mostly worked on my bug list. nothing too major as yet."
Temi trails off, "Taking a look... doesn't look like anything too exciting"
Azarial says, "Motly just trying to get it back under 200"
Temi nods.
Temi states, "Oh, we did update the captivity policies on escape attempts"
Temi claims, "If captors are actively offering RP and you are saying that you aren't available, you can't do an escape attempt until after you've provided that RP to them"
Temi says, "So no hanging around in jail refusing RP until someone breaks you out, because you know they want to kill you"
Maura questions, "Wasn't that already the policy? "
Nadya says, "I addition is good, to elaborate. It defines expectations, and defines RP avoidance for the scenario."
Nadya claims, "I think the addition is good, to elaborate. It defines expectations, and defines RP avoidance for the scenario. (Wow, I'm tired.)"
Temi claims, "It's more explicit now. Rather than just not avoiding RP, you explicitly need to make sure you have the scene with them if they are offering it"
Temi states, "It wasn't necessarily acceptable before, but now we have it a bit better defined."
Temi nods at Nadya.
Maura trails off, "Ah... well clarification and further detail is always good"
Temi questions, "Okay then! Moving on to player heartbeat. How was RP this week?"
Empena states, "I've had some good scenes so that was interesting. Mildly bummed this year we didn't have anything going on for the holiday."
Maura states, "It was there. Been so long since I actually rped it was weird getting back into it."
Nadya says, "A little slow. This week, it feels, was all about watching drama unfold on the wayside. The revived characters, though, are trying very hard, so special shoutout to them."
Maura wonders, "Revived characters?"
Temi claims, "Some old policy stuff came back up to Kin with people being kidnapped and then RPed with until they had enough familiarity to kill them, which is against the rules."
Temi states, "It's intended that you don't target people until you have the familiarity with them."
Maura claims, "Oh that. Wasn't actually aware they had to be revived."
Maura says, "Also that reminds me, I do have a topic I wish to bring up."
Azarial says, "They had been validated."
Nadya trails off, "Yeah... That situation was a bit..."
Temi claims, "So that behavior was unacceptable.. when Kin found out about it, those characters were 'found imprisoned and released'"
Azarial states, "So I had to jump through the hoops to unvalidate. at least that is a bit better than unliquidating."
Empena claims, "I have something I'd like to bring up related to that about it 'shitting' on me."
Temi states, "ICly, they aren't revived."
Temi nods at Empena.
Nadya hon hon hon's at the FOUNTAIN item of wine.
Temi claims, "I did set it out to go with your goblets."
Safir drinks from wine for birthdays new years and spring awakening.
Nadya raises a polished wooden goblet painted with cheery spring flowers to Temi, "Lord bless."
Temi asks of Empena, "Did you want to bring that up during your topic, or discuss now?"
Empena claims, "I believe that with a major decision like that - an IC Event post that tells the 'official' story about what happened would have been rather helpful. As ... without an official story, working that into things ... is difficult. I've tried my hardest to drive RP related to it (which someone else liked so it seems, so that's good). However - some of that is being used in a narrative so it seems to 'place blame' on what is essentially an OOC decision by staff on people ICly."
Temi claims, "I think the IC story of it involves a fair amount of confusion."
Maura claims, "It certainly does seem like it could have negative side effects on our current brotherhood, which to my understanding none of the current members were actually responsible for the policy breach."
Nadya wonders, "I mean, I've seen that event be used in a pretty strange way. Uh... Such as involving our prior GI/EM and kinda smearing 'em?"
Nadya muses, "Is it faux pas to do that to liquidated/non-grid characters, since the ordeal changed?"
Temi claims, "If there's actual problems, rather than just confusion and what people want to do in RP, you can appeal to Kin about it, as she made the decisions on how it would go down."
Temi claims, "There's no protections against liquidated/non-grid characters though. They continue to be real people that were a part of this world"
Derfel states to Maura, "I was going to say it makes the Brotherhood sound like random assholes, but you said it better."
Nadya states, "Yeah... They did kinda make it feel like I couldn't interact with the brotherhood without being pkilled."
Temi states, "How the current brotherhood presents themself is up to them."
Nadya claims, "Though, the current Brotherhood actually seems like it has restraint. So props to them."
Maura coughs
Derfel claims to Temi, "It isn't, though, if the Brotherhood has been keeping people kidnapped ICly for little reason."
Maura trails off, "I'd argue it's not so much restraint but just the lack of numbers or anything. Brotherhood hasn't really gotten back up to where it once was in the past... "
Azarial states, "The ones behind it are gone, if that helsp the cojfusion"
Maura fondly remembers the times of Naer.
Temi claims, "No actions have been placed on the current brotherhood."
Derfel tells you, "I was going to make an OOC character for chats but then I realised I don't care if people OOCly know I'm in the Brotherhood"
Temi claims, "If current players wish to say it has, that's up to others to take ICly"
Derfel nods at Temi.
Temi says, "If you have a problem - I can't fix it. Talk to Kin."
Nadya states, "I'd... Argue more for restraint. They seem more willing to actually perpetuate RP, than pkill."
Maura trails off, "Sounds like the brotherhood needs to just make a statement distancing themselves from the offendors..."
Temi says, "Painting all people of one group with one brush is a totally IC problem to have."
Temi asks, "Okay, so! Anything else we ought to know about how RP was this week? Anything shitting anyone?"
Derfel finishes his note.
Temi declaims, "Okay then! Moving on!"
Temi wonders, "Rothgar, you had a topic?"
Rothgar says, "I did, thank you."
Rothgar states, "So recently we've had staff decide that in the seeming lack of canidates for the Order (For the GI position, to clarify), they would animate an NPC in order to fill the gap that has been left. Let me first point out that while I generally agree with this decision, I do have a few questions for the imms concerning the situation at hand."
Rothgar says, "First : This is an already established character. Knowing that there are people on-grid who recognize this 'NPC' as a pre-established character - myself being trained by Jenifyr during my starting times on the MUD - how do we justify no longer being able to RP with this character, as they're now an NPC?
Two : Considering that Staff now effectively run the Order and all of it's investigations and warrants, how does Staff intend to not only do this with a single NPC, but also to remain impartial to the overall structure of the MUD, as any investigations or warrants written will be, quite literally, direct Staff intervention.
Three : How will politics work with this NPC, at all? Arugably, they're not actually on the guildleader list, and cannot be affected by Ousting or otherwise affected by other players in a policital realm. If this NPC intends to become arguably the most powerful PC in game, what recourse will other players have if they turn out to be shit, or corrupt? Whom will we address? The Queen? The Cardinal? Both of them, unfortunately, are Staff. I find the idea of that to be very uncomfortable. Writing a Staff member about themselves to provide oversight on themselves.
Finally, fourth : Given that staff NPC's are, presumably, a thing now, and they're on-grid and RP'ing with others, will other NPC's become available to speak to? NPC's like the Queen, the Cardinal, and others? Because I'll be frank : I would very, -very- much like to finally RP with the Cardinal after all of the IC shenannigans that he's put me through."
Rothgar states, "To finish up, I don't disagree with the sentiment that Staff seem alright with animating an NPC to serve as GI. Sometimes shit happens. With that said, it's probably one of the least NPC'able roles in the game, and I'm incredibly curious what recourse or defense the players will have if they become targetted by this NPC, and - as Staff will presumably be directly intervening in RP - if they will be subject to the same political or social bunkum that we've been forced to deal with over the last few months."
Temi states, "She is an NPC, meaning she does not have player motivations and is not allowed to just do her own thing, but is just there to fill in on that job."
Rothgar claims, "If needed, I can certainly email Kin about this."
Temi states, "That said, she -is- there. She can be RPed with and things can be addressed to her"
Kinaed steps out of your shadow. [OOC]
Kinaed says OOCly, "So... did another daylight savings happen?"
Derfel states, "Kinaed, Kinaed, Kinaed"
Temi queries, "Actually.. can you repeat your topic?"
Rothgar says to Temi, "And that's great, but how do investigations and warrants get filled, then? Or will that be a situation of inactivity."
Azarial states, "Not yet, no."
Rothgar claims, "I can, certainly."
Rothgar states, "Apologies for the spam."
Temi asks of Kinaed, "Not for us.. did you? I wouldn't have expected it"
Maura trails off, "This isn't the first time said character has been brought in to fill in a gap while there were no inquisitors... and the last time it happened, thinks didn't implode"
[Rothgar repeats his question - edited for clarity.]
Kinaed states, "I think I just got the time wrong again. Sorry, folks. Happy to leave it in Temi's hands.
"Temi says, "Anyway, as I was just telling Rothgar in response to this topic, she's an NPC in that she's only there for this purpose, not to have her own motivations, not that she can't be RPed with"
Temi claims, "But as Kin is running the character, I can mainly let her respond to it"
Temi states, "Anyway, she'll be gone as soon as we can get a player in."
Temi says, "It's not ideal to have an NPC in that position, but arguably better than no one."
Rothgar states, "I agree, yes."
Temi says, "Also, they are not grand inquisitor. They are a high inquisitor."
Kinaed says, "Hmm. Speaking for myself - I'm sorry you appear to distrust me so sincerely, etc, but I don't see how anything I say will change your apparent feelings on the matter. I'm fulfilling a necessary role that multiple people request be filled until we get a GI, and I'll leave it at that. "
Rothgar claims, "I'm not arguing that it's not neccessary, nor that I distrust you."
Kinaed states, "I think what you said above indicates otherwise."
Kinaed claims, "And that's okay with me."
Rothgar says, "Then we can agree to disagree, but the questions still stand."
Kinaed says, "I just don't see any point in arguing over it."
Temi says, "Okay. 1) You can still RP with this character."
Rothgar says, "I - alright. Fair enough."
Kinaed claims to Rothgar, "To me, it read as a pretty long list of reasons that you don't approve of a decision, most of which I literally just logged into cold. I'm not in a position to answer them in this forum under pressure that quickly."
Temi says, "2) decisions will be made based on information presented to the character, not personal motivations."
Kinaed says to Temi, "Thanks, I'll leave it to your hands.
"Rothgar states, "That's absolutely fine."
Rothgar claims, "I'd be more than willing to discuss via email, or what have you, no pressure."
Temi claims, "3) they will be replaced as soon as we have someone willing to take the position and they can be targeted by anything necessary. You can address things to the cardinal if necessary. I'm sure Kin will let me review things involving Jenifyr"
Rothgar nods at Temi.
Temi says, "4) generally, no, if we can at all avoid it"
Rothgar states, "Alrighty. Thank you, Temi, for your answers."
Kinaed states, "No need; I back Temi's answers and plan to abide by them."
Temi questions, "Okay. That addresses everything then?"
Rothgar claims, "I believe that it does, yes, thank you once again for answering, Temi."
Temi questions, "Okay, Empena, you had a topic?"
Empena states, "I'd like to put forth the idea that foraging like searching rooms (as was recently peeked at/edited) be relative to the person rather than per room. As ... otherwise it becomes a first come first serve to whom has the best play times/availability when the switch over happens."
Empena states, "And given that there in some cases a very limited number of rooms where certain things are found that can be ... a bit gamey."
Temi queries, "So, a single person can forage for an item three times in a room, even if someone else has been foraging in that room?"
Empena nods.
Temi claims, "If certain things are highly limited, it might be desirable for those items to be a limited resource, that not everyone gets a stock of every week, though, too"
Temi claims, "I could see that change still limiting abuse, but it doesn't really follow ICly at all"
Empena says, "I think that's fine too. But then I think it should be more relative to chance or some other system besides - first person who gets there might get the only chance. Or perhaps make your daily luck stat a factor in addition to your foraging skill."
Temi claims, "They do regrow slowly over time, so it's not like there's a reset and the next person to be there will win it"
Temi claims, "But yes, if someone checks every day, they would have a better chance at the limited resource"
Temi muses, "Has this been an issue people have noted widely?"
Temi asks, "And what sort of things has it been for? Would they reasonably be limited things?"
Nadya states, "I think there's plenty of nature and city rooms to forage from, though. And by the time it refreshes, it's pretty much impossible for even one person religiously foraging to really either keep up the MV to do so, or have sections of grid unavailable to forage from."
Nadya questions, "The only type of rooms I can imagine this would be an issue in, is mountainous, since there's a little less of that, than the rest?"
Safir queries, "What exactly is the change that is happening?"
Azarial claims, "Re forage? nothing atm."
Temi claims, "I'd be more likely to think of something like varying the resets on very common things, rather than by room, so you could regularly forage for common stuff, but maybe rarely for rare stuff"
Kinaed says to Safir, "Empena is requesting that we change the restrictions on forage that current cause a place to deplete for approximately three days when a player forages in the location."
Temi claims, "But that would take a revamp on foraging"
Empena claims, "Well, it's the same whether the things are rare or common. IE - someone can forage all the rare things in a room, but that means things that are Common or basically in theory there all the time can no longer be found either. IE - what is "missing" isn't relative to rarity or even by item which is sort of the oddity from an RP standpoint at times."
Temi states, "Right, just considering what the problematic sorts of things are. But I'm not hearing that this is a widespread issue currently"
Kinaed states, "To me, it sounds as if things are working as intended."
Empena states, "Okay, just an idea."
Temi nods.
Kinaed nods at Empena.
Temi exclaims, "THanks for bringing it up!"
Temi asks, "Okay, Maura you had a topic?"
Maura claims, "Sorry, was rewording it."
Maura clears throat "So I had this written out originally, but damn do I ramble in the original. So just gonna put it simply. It would be nice to have a guidelines of sort for what would qualify as exemptable worthy for pkills, ie where the familiarity is not needed. I say this as someone who has tried to hire an asassin icly to take care of someone who was a thorn in Vicannia's side, but whom avoided Vicannia at all costs, icly of course... that I am aware of. The familiarity requirement is quite easily manipulable. Oh, see this person you besmirch regularly has joined your scene? easy enough to come up with an ic way to get out of the scene. Of course this also works in real life, but irl that doesn't stop the person from killing you if they find."
Maura says, "Hopefully this is making sense? I feel like I'm not explaining what I am trying to explain very well. And mind you, not trying to point fingers or anything. Vicannia is long dead, which is why I feel comfortable bringing this up, especially consider I have to be honest I entertained the very plan that was used against the two revived characters just to get that familiarity requirement. Never went through, but it was a possibility had other events not taken place."
Kinaed states, "Historically, people have raised being hired by someone who does have familiarity as the common exemption."
Kinaed claims, "For example, Jane and Bob have a conflict, Jane hires Anna to do the killing, but Anna doesn't have the necessary familiarity to finish."
Rothgar says, "Actually that sounds like a good suggestion, Maura. Listing what needs to be done, why, giving an example of what a 'proper' pkill looks like."
Kinaed says, "When the exemption was written in, that was the case study discussed with players during the policy formulation."
Sikod is idle.
Maura states, "But how do you gain familiarity when the 'besmircher' actively avoids any rp with you, while still besmirching from the safety of anywhere else"
Temi claims, "I think there's pretty good guidelines in general, but it's hard to come up with more specific guidelines for every case."
Kinaed says, "I think that already exists with HELP VALIDATION and HELP PKILL."
Empena states, "I brought that idea up on a pboard as a topic but forgot, also a thought about the RPing with unconscious people thing. As ... presently that might count as RP with them for familarity when that's very one sided."
Temi states, "If you have a specific case where someone is causing you problems but avoiding you, I think bringing it up to staff for an exception is a-okay"
Kinaed nods at Temi.
Temi claims, "And we could look at that specific situation, which probably isn't broad enough for a rule of its own"
Kinaed states, "We'll review requests on a case by case basis and approve those we deem have the necessary merit."
Maura nods in understanding "So... okay. I have to imagine cnotes, obviously, and logs would be helpful for requesting an exemption? I'm just asking because this is a problem I've run into in the past, not currently, but the past.
Kinaed claims, "As to a guideline regarding what merit means - it has to outweigh the priority of what having the familiarity on the Finish command is intended to do - ensure good RP."
Kinaed states, "And protect TI's environment."
Temi says, "Quite likely she would have gotten permission to handle it, because they had a lot of RP, just not in person RP."
Maura queries, "So behind scenes, political rp could still count as rp?"
Kinaed says to Maura, "I think a Request Board explaining the situation is enough to request an exemption, but the cnotes and whatnot are required for other policy reasons."
Kinaed nods at Maura.
Temi states, "Depending on the situation, it certainly could"
Maura nods "I think that answers my question."
Temi asks, "Okay. I think that about puts us out of time... did anyone have anything else we didn't get addressed?"
Temi declares, "Okay then.. I'll go ahead and send folks back.. and sure, refill the goblets before you go!"
Maura states, "Never filled it to begin with"
Temi trails off, "Okay, then, sending everyone back... "
Temi trails off, "3..."
Temi states, "2.."
Temi states, "1.."