[Poll] Enforcing Theme

[Tremere]

Burning Post 2 temporarily legalized magery as long as they registered to try and appease people who didn't like mages being outlawed. It didn't go over well. I don't like the idea of drastic theme changes.

[Limonade]

I can name more than a few parts of our theme which are not compelling to play. At some point, we have to decide what is important (our central, religious conflict feels almost absent on grid these days and that isn't right), and let go of the other stuff. I'm not talking about changing theme, I am talking flat out about removing certain bits which people are not engaging in. I assume this has happened, at some point, considering that we no longer have a serf class.

[Voxumo]

I don't think the serf class ever existed, or if it did it existed in the original adaptation of TI.

[Rothgar]

Staff and I often don't see eye-to-eye, but after MUD'ing for damn near 10 years, and Imm'ing on some other MUD's, I have to say that I appreciate what they do. I'm harder then shit to get along with, and they've been civil with me over the years, regardless of how badly I've mucked up. And 9 times outta 10, if I'm in violation of theme, all they do is shoot me a pboard with a relevant helpfile and ask me to change it up.

Honestly, of all the stuff to be miffed about on the MUD, the imms - perhaps surprisingly - aren't one of the things I'm miffed about.

[Zeita]

The serf class (and one other low class below freeman, I want to say villein) did exist as playable at one stage... and it tended to be an XP grab (they were a negative xp cost IIRC) that ended up being played like Freemen. However, serfs do still exist thematically all over the realm, they're just not appropriate PCs, because they're bonded to the land. I think we've chosen to deemphasise that element of theme, even though it is still in the background makeup of the setting.

I'm not against deemphasising elements of theme, although there is nothing jumping out at me as likely targets. Granted, I have not been party to any recent serious theme breaches, so this is theoretical to me in general, while others are probably thinking of specific incidents.

[SilverMoon]

I actually like the way staff go about reinforcing theme, and just the way things are run in general. I have played a lot of muds. In the passed muds I have played, the staff pretty much try an force you to rp in a way that they see as right, or that they think is thematic, or that they perceive is the way it should be done. I like TI's way of just yes there are guidelines, don't break these rules, but beyond that, go do your thing. It's actually refreshing, to see the staff take a sort of hands off approach as far as that goes, and also encouraging players to really role play, by giving rp assistance and helping with storyline and plots. I have played muds where in the passed, for me to get staff assistance for anything, felt like a huge hurdal and burden. At every corner, I felt like perhaps I might be yelled at for not role playing something a certain way. So it's really nice and relaxing to not have to feel that way.

[Kinaed]

I'm glad some people seem pretty happy.

I also agree that it's not the place of staff to generally tell players how to play beyond fixing gross excesses (light sabers and spaceships clearly aren't thematic, but telling an individual that they absolutely MUST hate a given Charali is too circumstantial for my taste.)

That said, there were a large number of people who voted for more intervention - to those people, I ask - what sort of additional intervention are you hoping for?

[Dice]

In an ideal world:

* Very brief character bios that explain a character's role in society requiring approval to play, to prevent concepts that aren't utterly thematic - especially for gentry+ PCs, who frequently do not RP in any way that fits their social class;

Things I think a little more likely, and more important:

* Lock down guild structures/ranks, missions, purposes, and central policies so that GLs are not constantly reinventing the wheel;

* Most importantly: Stringently support protections for bad guy PCs in order to allow criminal/heretical/magical RP to flourish, while allowing for some level of IC corruption For example, reiterate that Reeves can only execute for capital crimes, period, and an execution for less is NOT legally allowable. That way, if the Reeves want to execute someone for less, they have to find a way to exaggerate the charges into treason or murder, or outright fake a treason or murder charge. This allows for corruption, but gives bad guys some level of protection (as Reeves may not be willing to falsify/exaggerate charges).

Similarly, emphasize that Inquisitor warrants require some solid evidence (potentially with a definition of what counts as evidence?) and arresting someone 'on a feeling' is not ICly okay.

I recognize some people feel that undercuts IC power. Yeah, that may be true, inasmuch as it puts some checks and limits into place. But Reeves and Inquisitors both will still be able to -legally kill you-, and even then be able to kill you and potentially get away with it even if you've done nothing wrong. That should be more than enough to keep them frighteningly powerful AND able to do their jobs.

And, more importantly, it ensures that bad guys are not beaten into submission as soon as they put a toe out of line. This is critical. This is so critical that, years ago, Temi explicitly wrote help summary laws to clarify some crimes allow for execution and some don't. Why? Because we had people killed for minor crimes. We had Thieves telling us "I won't steal because I'd be killed for it." We had very good reason to put that protection into theme, and it needs to be enforced.

We have always struggled with maintaining sufficient conflict RP, and the recent precedent set by Nils' execution was a terrible step backward for this. It needs to be reversed permanently and it needs to be reversed now.

[Ava]

Massive +1 to the latter of Dice's post. I don't know if I haven't been around long enough to know, but the game feels rather post-story: it feels like the most meaningful parts have already happened, the seventh season is over, and now this is a fan fiction where people don't want to mess with canon too much, at least from what I can see from my limited perspective. Dav won, consolidation happened, and now that the scope is becoming much smaller it feels like there is a big risk of there being little to expect from the setting besides whack-a-mole problem solving plots.

Problems being characters who step outside of toeing the line, then small ST plot stuff like rat infestations, plague of the weeks, etc. People like having something to solve when they are in an enforcement role but I've seen that squash diversity right out of a game, and I have no idea if any of this actually reflects what's going on more than a surface level on TI, or from my perspective, but it's worrying.

[Tremere]

I don't really agree with Dice on the capital crime thing. This is a medieval society and I think the punishments in general have been extremely lenient in the past for crimes, especially for repeat offenders. I like to encourage the the villain vs lawful conflict, but not at the expense of a sort of realism. Lord knows I haven't pursued half the things that Tomas could have suspected because I wanted to let things continue on. But with criminals who repeatedly break the law, especially violently and do nothing to reform and it goes on and there is a distinct pattern, I think that that should be enough to escalate punishments.

Do I think someone should be executed for stealing? No. But I do think that if someone is repeatedly stealing and increasing fines don't work, then the good old fashioned chopping off the hand sort of thing could work. I would love to see more use of branding for lesser offensive for repeat offenders. This game has a tendency to not want to punish some of the major criminals because they are popular, even when it would make sense for their crimes. We've seen heretics dumped into the Bren so many times with nothing else done to them that it's become a joke.