[Poll] Theme Enforcement - the gentle approach

[The_Last_Good_Dragon]

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.

That is what I'm saying, just so there's no confusion! 'Theme Cultivating' is, to me, a style of enforcement; you've put it much more elegantly than me.

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'.

I'm actually not in favor of the first half of this but certainly am the latter. From a gameplay point-of-view it can be hard enough to have the upper ranks of the clergy filled in the best of times; from a thematic approach I don't think Davism is inately inclined towards making this distinction, though I do think that Staff could do more to cultivate the un-ignorable truth that Freemen reaching such positions of power is entirely uncommon.

- 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'm all on board with these, especially the slavery-in-Lithmore thing. Especially especially especially. Thematically this can be done without great stress: the outlying duchies certainly have to have been complaining about this for some time, and it simply makes sense to tolerate slavery in the capitol city as it's legal in three of the four other Duchies. Maybe make a distinction that slaves cannot be bought or sold in Lithmore — ie, the institution is tolerated and allowed but is not alloowed to flourish within it. Of all the ideas I've heard to enforce a dark theme to the world, this is absolutely the best I've heard yet. I'm jealous I didn't think of it!

- I'd probably be inclined to hack out the laws of Charity and Caring as I think they encourage too much fluffiness.

I don't think I'm in favor of entirely removing the laws, but I would like to see a lot more 'interpretation' of these parts of the religion (read: ignoring it). They seem like the sort of thing that those in power would do begrudgingly and selfishly whenever they were done. Let there be the generous sort, sure, but those who don't abide in practice and pay only lip-service in this regard shouldn't be treated as outliers. This is the sort of thing Staff Cultivation might be able to help fix. Players will, however, lean towards being nice and fluffy to other players in the general way of things.

[Zeita]

Klapman:

My comment on harshness certainly isn't directed at any players and more an overall preference from a theme POV. Honestly, I've barely seen any of your RP as Renton, but I've enjoyed -and have no complaints about-what I have seen!

Just to comment on the last paragraph, Klapman... being GI is a really tough gig and I really admire anyone willing to take a shot at it. In a certain sense, from my experience across several times in the job, I found that I really did have to 'harden my heart' (Very apt terminology there) against it. I think, in a certain sense, anyone playing here needs to accept that they may meet an untimely or unexpected death at the hands of Inquisitors (or others).

[Voxumo]

Firstly, infavor of more distinction between the classes, though I wouldn't limit roles to class, for reasons similar to what Dragon said. It's hard enough filling some roles as is.

Though I am against the Slavery thing. My main reason for being against this, is because there's been numerous plots that have been done, with the gist of it being actively squashing slavery, except in those locations that allow it.
I guess what I am trying to say is I hope any changes that do come about from this thread, do not undo prior events, or established stories that have taken place. Slavery being the prime example here.

[The_Last_Good_Dragon]

Numerous plots have been done against slavery because it's outlawed and Lithmorrans in general do not favor it. Legalizing it changes neither of those things -- that it HAD been outlawed, at least, and that Lithmorrans still DON'T favor it. The idea of conflict between what is socially acceptable can be greatly enhanced by seeing players with slave NPCs treated like slaves — though I WOULD personally make being an IC slave something Players cannot be— limit that to NPCs.

[Voxumo]

Numerous plots have been done against slavery because it's outlawed and Lithmorrans in general do not favor it. Legalizing it changes neither of those things -- that it HAD been outlawed, at least, and that Lithmorrans still DON'T favor it. The idea of conflict between what is socially acceptable can be greatly enhanced by seeing players with slave NPCs treated like slaves — though I WOULD personally make being an IC slave something Players cannot be— limit that to NPCs.

Actually yes it does. Why would Lithmore suddenly legalize something they've actively fought and spent resources to remove and suppress? If memory serves me right, the only location that actually still supports slavery and allows it freely is Tubor? Or perhaps farin. One of the two still allows slavery.

[The_Last_Good_Dragon]

Numerous plots have been done against slavery because it's outlawed and Lithmorrans in general do not favor it. Legalizing it changes neither of those things -- that it HAD been outlawed, at least, and that Lithmorrans still DON'T favor it. The idea of conflict between what is socially acceptable can be greatly enhanced by seeing players with slave NPCs treated like slaves — though I WOULD personally make being an IC slave something Players cannot be— limit that to NPCs.

Actually yes it does. Why would Lithmore suddenly legalize something they've actively fought and spent resources to remove and suppress? If memory serves me right, the only location that actually still supports slavery and allows it freely is Tubor? Or perhaps farin. One of the two still allows slavery.

According to the slavery helpfile, all of the outlying Duchies save for Vavard have legal slavery. As for the reason for things being "sudden"? Politics. Economics. Social Pressure. Change is the nature of all three of those things. A new Queen might be more vulnerable to the pressures from her longer-established Dukes and Duchesses to be more lenient and accepting of the cultures of the capitol's neighbors.

[Voxumo]

Hmm, so I was remembering it backwards...But nonetheless, I still stand by my prior comment. On top of that I do not see slavery bringing anything to the game. If the role of slaves is not be filled by actual players, then it will more than likely end up the way pets and retainers are already rped, which is barely at all. Yes there are those that do include their retainers in rp, but it is rare.

[Kinaed]

I want to thank everyone who spoke up after the prodding. I appreciate the comments.

I see there's some stuff about making the backdrop of the game grittier - I'll ask people to focus on that in another thread, which I'll kick off.

Here are some examples that I'd love to get specific opinions on:
- What would players like staff to do when someone reports something like the Grand Inquisitor becoming IC friends with the GL of the Manus?
- What would players like staff to do when someone reports a noble consistently acting like a freeman?
- What would players like staff to do when someone reports a GI letting known mages go?

What scenarios did I not mention above, if any, that you think staff really ought to make an exception to get actively involved to step in on?

[Voxumo]

Firstly, does the GI know that friend is the Rubeus? I mean if they know icly yet still are friends... I'd prefer staff to check whether or not this is part of some bigger plot. Like maybe the GI is actually a mage, but if not, and the GI is just friends with the Rubeus then I'd prefer if staff strongly remind them both of theme, and that they are meant to be enemies, and that if they ignore this... maybe staff drop a little hint to other players via rumor or something that can be discovered, so that the players can discover and handle it.

Second example, much like the first, a reminder of just what their role is suppose to be, maybe direct them to helpfiles, and if they still do it, a warning and then either removed as a noble or create some plot where the people of the domain revolt against the noble since freeman and gentry won't respect a noble who is not acting in their station.

Third example: Are they ICly letting them go or oocly letting them go in hopes it spurs rp? Like letting a mage "Escape"?

[Kinaed]

First Example: Yes, in the situation described, it'd only be an issue of the GI knew his buddy was the Rubeus Manus (otherwise, it's hardly against theme for a mage to deceive someone).

Third Example: ICly.