Similar to cnotes, I'd love a little log of confessions that players can add entries to for their character, viewable by the Order (maybe once roles comes in only Inquisitors and up). I feel like it would lead to a lot of RP short of brutal penance. This would be things that characters would tell those vNPC priests they -say- they go to confession with.
------
On a side note, I feel that 'vNPC priests' should only be your go-to for confessions when there isn't a player priest online. But that's just me being frustrated.
Confessions
The only problem I really see with this is that confessions are theoretically supposed to be sealed, so I don't know how this sort of dynamic would fit with theme. I also know that, from a paperwork point of view, I personally don't need yet another reason to hate confession or writing cnotes, and having to write cnotes about confessions is going to give me one. The point being that it could be onerous and discourage people coming to confession.
As for the frustration, I understand it, and here's my view on it:
The Reeves have a certain codified way of dealing with things, and there are likely consequences if they deviate much from that. When I steal something, I know that I'm likely going to get whipped or fined or put in the stocks, not have a limb removed or something because that's just not the way this works. There is a good deal of leeway in what penalties are, but there are also certain boundaries.
The Order doesn't have anything like that, and that's a serious problem when it comes to the central religious body within the game, especially when there is nobody that can step in and help control things when the Order gets out of control with its brutality. When the Reeves get out of control, like when Yves was Justiciar, the nobles can step in. There is nothing like that for the order, and, in fact, that it's so many times mages that take out the bad leaders in the Order may be partially why so many people seem to view them OOCly as the heros and the Order as the bad guys.
The bottom line is that I play this game to have fun. Period. Going to confession with something that I would perceive as relatively minor like fussing or getting a little too drunk and then having somebody ream me or try to pile on all kinds of random sins that don't even logically apply isn't fun. It's annoying, and it makes me want to never, ever RP confession.
I'm not saying that I don't expect to be punished or have to do penance, but I am saying that there doesn't really seem to be any requirement or even tacit expectation that sins applied or the seriousness of penances will be logical or even remotely reasonable from the canonical side of things the way that there is amongst the secular side of things, and I view that as a very major stone around the Order's neck.
Bottom line: I'm NOT happy to have my char dragged in for a review of faith over fornication the same way that I'm not happy to have my character nearly beheaded over a bar fight.
The former could potentially happen if somebody got a wild hair, while the later probably could not because there is absolutely no control mechanism for insanity within the Order, and it's neither fun nor fair for the rest of us.
Disclaimer: THIS IS MY OPINION AND MY EXPRESSING OF MY THOUGHTS.
As for the frustration, I understand it, and here's my view on it:
The Reeves have a certain codified way of dealing with things, and there are likely consequences if they deviate much from that. When I steal something, I know that I'm likely going to get whipped or fined or put in the stocks, not have a limb removed or something because that's just not the way this works. There is a good deal of leeway in what penalties are, but there are also certain boundaries.
The Order doesn't have anything like that, and that's a serious problem when it comes to the central religious body within the game, especially when there is nobody that can step in and help control things when the Order gets out of control with its brutality. When the Reeves get out of control, like when Yves was Justiciar, the nobles can step in. There is nothing like that for the order, and, in fact, that it's so many times mages that take out the bad leaders in the Order may be partially why so many people seem to view them OOCly as the heros and the Order as the bad guys.
The bottom line is that I play this game to have fun. Period. Going to confession with something that I would perceive as relatively minor like fussing or getting a little too drunk and then having somebody ream me or try to pile on all kinds of random sins that don't even logically apply isn't fun. It's annoying, and it makes me want to never, ever RP confession.
I'm not saying that I don't expect to be punished or have to do penance, but I am saying that there doesn't really seem to be any requirement or even tacit expectation that sins applied or the seriousness of penances will be logical or even remotely reasonable from the canonical side of things the way that there is amongst the secular side of things, and I view that as a very major stone around the Order's neck.
Bottom line: I'm NOT happy to have my char dragged in for a review of faith over fornication the same way that I'm not happy to have my character nearly beheaded over a bar fight.
The former could potentially happen if somebody got a wild hair, while the later probably could not because there is absolutely no control mechanism for insanity within the Order, and it's neither fun nor fair for the rest of us.
Disclaimer: THIS IS MY OPINION AND MY EXPRESSING OF MY THOUGHTS.
Over my time here I've seen the Order only lean towards too nice BECAUSE of OOC perspectives like this, and it's honestly really discouraging to have somebody tell you that your line of RP is less valid than any other because a few bad eggs might have made it sour for them. So thanks for contributing to that negativity. I guess the main point of my frustration (and this is pretty much all frustration) is that people are so god damn picky about their RP. "Oh, I want to do X, but I don't want to RP consequence Y. I want to do relationship RP, but only if those relationships are good. I don't ever want to be in a stressful scene."
There's a certain point where waving the flag of 'different strokes for different folks' becomes damaging to the story. Because that's the point; it's all story, and it's not all going to be nice, or consensual. I've been trying to be really mutual about Orderite RP, and honestly that's just not working, so I'm tempted to just drag people into it kicking and screaming like I do with most RP.
Okay, okay, rant done. Sorry.
What I don't understand is the stated difference between Order and Reeves. Both guilds virtually have the same coded applications of dealing with things; it's where they RP these interactions that there is a difference and that might have been what was being stated. If so, I can only call upon past reference; I've rarely seen an Order punishment that wasn't deserved. I've seen a few that were ill thought out, yes, and rushed. Things like ice baths, public flogging, etc -- these are all very similar to what the Reeves do. The Order has a control in its leadership (often flawed, yes, just like any other guild you get your good months and your bad months). It sounds like the Orderite scenes you've played have been fairly one-sided and I'm sorry to hear that, but please, please don't give up on the RP entirely because of a few bad scenes. Orderite RP is just like any other scene: sometimes good, sometimes bad.
-------------------
In short I guess the point here is please, please don't judge the RP of a whole guild (when many people in that guild might be new TO that guild) based on the actions of a few people. We definitely don't have a charter saying 'pile every sin on Urth into every confession'.
I'm similar in a way; I'm very picky about who I chose my confession RP with (or any RP, nowadays). However in those moments it works, it REALLY works. There have been confession scenes with Iain that have changed my character's whole perspective on the world. Not all confessions are going to end up badly, just like any other scene.
Stop 'sceneism', guys.
There's a certain point where waving the flag of 'different strokes for different folks' becomes damaging to the story. Because that's the point; it's all story, and it's not all going to be nice, or consensual. I've been trying to be really mutual about Orderite RP, and honestly that's just not working, so I'm tempted to just drag people into it kicking and screaming like I do with most RP.
Okay, okay, rant done. Sorry.
What I don't understand is the stated difference between Order and Reeves. Both guilds virtually have the same coded applications of dealing with things; it's where they RP these interactions that there is a difference and that might have been what was being stated. If so, I can only call upon past reference; I've rarely seen an Order punishment that wasn't deserved. I've seen a few that were ill thought out, yes, and rushed. Things like ice baths, public flogging, etc -- these are all very similar to what the Reeves do. The Order has a control in its leadership (often flawed, yes, just like any other guild you get your good months and your bad months). It sounds like the Orderite scenes you've played have been fairly one-sided and I'm sorry to hear that, but please, please don't give up on the RP entirely because of a few bad scenes. Orderite RP is just like any other scene: sometimes good, sometimes bad.
-------------------
In short I guess the point here is please, please don't judge the RP of a whole guild (when many people in that guild might be new TO that guild) based on the actions of a few people. We definitely don't have a charter saying 'pile every sin on Urth into every confession'.
I'm similar in a way; I'm very picky about who I chose my confession RP with (or any RP, nowadays). However in those moments it works, it REALLY works. There have been confession scenes with Iain that have changed my character's whole perspective on the world. Not all confessions are going to end up badly, just like any other scene.
Stop 'sceneism', guys.
Player of: Alexander ab Courtland
I want to challenge three central ideas here:
1) That the Order is less accountable than the Reeves;
2) That the Order is more subjective than the Reeves;
3) That bad things happening to your character is a bad thing.
Accountability:
The Order is held accountable. I should note that I am pretty sure the Regent doesn't even HAVE the power to flat-out remove a GL any longer; if the Regent wants someone out, they have to use ousting. (I want to say I was directly told this at one point.) This is the same whether the Regent wants to remove the Justiciar, Cardinal, or GI, so every guildleader is held accountable by the same mechanism - i.e., held equally accountable.
Anybody remember Haeva? Was seen as too burn-happy, so a concentrated push by people largely outside the Order had her removed. This has actually happened multiple times to Order GLs just in my memory - the weight of disapproval, whether RP'd or coded, got them ousted if they turned out to be too punishment-heavy. So I really dispute this idea that there is no check or balance on the Order. Our very first ousting ever in the history of TI:L was, in fact, a Cardinal.
Subjectivity:
The Order DOES have codified practices in the Book of Penances. These may be less detailed in matching specific sins to specific penances than the Reeves', but honestly? The Reeves' ones are just suggestions too. The same crime could receive whipping, losing a hand, or just a big fine. Individual Reeves also do have a lot of discretion as to what to 'call' a crime, which greatly changes its severity.
Because of this, I would in fact argue they have MORE discretion: an attack on someone can be called attempted murder which can be called murder which can lead to execution. Look at Casimir's execution - he didn't kill either of the people he was up on attempted murder charges for, and arguments could be made about either of the attempted murders not really qualifying, but he was nonetheless executed. This isn't a jab at the Reeves for doing so, but an illustration of how subjective Reeve procedure actually CAN be when the rubber hits the road. Subjectivity is inherently and intentionally built into the system, and I for one consider that a good thing.
So, now consider the Order. How many people can you recall the Order ever executing for heresy? Execution for heresy is so rare that the staff were recently asked if it is technically even ALLOWABLE, meaning that the Order is only likely to execute you for this one very specific crime - magery - as opposed to the Reeves' very technically blurry definitions of murder and treason.
The Value of Suffering in RP:
On confessions, I must echo Reid as well in saying that I've only ever seen people skew toward far too lenient punishments. But even if I hadn't...
What is the harm?
Any punishment short of execution just gives you something fun to RP, whether it be deserved or undeserved. Bad things happening to your character don't need to be awful for you as a player - if anything, they should be embraced. The punishments I've gotten in confession (when I could convince a priest to give me more than some mild community service!) have greatly enriched my RP, even when they involved lashing.
We have to learn to love things that inconvenience and even hurt our characters because conflict is the lifeblood of a game. Social RP is fine and valuable, but eventually it hits its end without something deeper and more profound to stir it on - and those moments of IC tension and suffering are those more profound things.
I understand certain forms of RP can be stressful; there are a few things I avoid because they are just too much misery to ever be fun. But when that list stretches to encompass anything that hurts or endangers a character, you're not able to get the full value out of RP and it becomes difficult to separate IC and OOC.
While to some extent we can't control our emotional reactions, I believe we can work on distancing ourselves from our characters' pain and goals. Cultivating a love for negative experiences in roleplay will only enrich the stories we tell.
1) That the Order is less accountable than the Reeves;
2) That the Order is more subjective than the Reeves;
3) That bad things happening to your character is a bad thing.
Accountability:
The Order is held accountable. I should note that I am pretty sure the Regent doesn't even HAVE the power to flat-out remove a GL any longer; if the Regent wants someone out, they have to use ousting. (I want to say I was directly told this at one point.) This is the same whether the Regent wants to remove the Justiciar, Cardinal, or GI, so every guildleader is held accountable by the same mechanism - i.e., held equally accountable.
Anybody remember Haeva? Was seen as too burn-happy, so a concentrated push by people largely outside the Order had her removed. This has actually happened multiple times to Order GLs just in my memory - the weight of disapproval, whether RP'd or coded, got them ousted if they turned out to be too punishment-heavy. So I really dispute this idea that there is no check or balance on the Order. Our very first ousting ever in the history of TI:L was, in fact, a Cardinal.
Subjectivity:
The Order DOES have codified practices in the Book of Penances. These may be less detailed in matching specific sins to specific penances than the Reeves', but honestly? The Reeves' ones are just suggestions too. The same crime could receive whipping, losing a hand, or just a big fine. Individual Reeves also do have a lot of discretion as to what to 'call' a crime, which greatly changes its severity.
Because of this, I would in fact argue they have MORE discretion: an attack on someone can be called attempted murder which can be called murder which can lead to execution. Look at Casimir's execution - he didn't kill either of the people he was up on attempted murder charges for, and arguments could be made about either of the attempted murders not really qualifying, but he was nonetheless executed. This isn't a jab at the Reeves for doing so, but an illustration of how subjective Reeve procedure actually CAN be when the rubber hits the road. Subjectivity is inherently and intentionally built into the system, and I for one consider that a good thing.
So, now consider the Order. How many people can you recall the Order ever executing for heresy? Execution for heresy is so rare that the staff were recently asked if it is technically even ALLOWABLE, meaning that the Order is only likely to execute you for this one very specific crime - magery - as opposed to the Reeves' very technically blurry definitions of murder and treason.
The Value of Suffering in RP:
On confessions, I must echo Reid as well in saying that I've only ever seen people skew toward far too lenient punishments. But even if I hadn't...
What is the harm?
Any punishment short of execution just gives you something fun to RP, whether it be deserved or undeserved. Bad things happening to your character don't need to be awful for you as a player - if anything, they should be embraced. The punishments I've gotten in confession (when I could convince a priest to give me more than some mild community service!) have greatly enriched my RP, even when they involved lashing.
We have to learn to love things that inconvenience and even hurt our characters because conflict is the lifeblood of a game. Social RP is fine and valuable, but eventually it hits its end without something deeper and more profound to stir it on - and those moments of IC tension and suffering are those more profound things.
I understand certain forms of RP can be stressful; there are a few things I avoid because they are just too much misery to ever be fun. But when that list stretches to encompass anything that hurts or endangers a character, you're not able to get the full value out of RP and it becomes difficult to separate IC and OOC.
While to some extent we can't control our emotional reactions, I believe we can work on distancing ourselves from our characters' pain and goals. Cultivating a love for negative experiences in roleplay will only enrich the stories we tell.
This is really just flawlessly put. Can we recommend OOC quotes for quit-quotes? >.>Dice wrote:We have to learn to love things that inconvenience and even hurt our characters because conflict is the lifeblood of a game. Social RP is fine and valuable, but eventually it hits its end without something deeper and more profound to stir it on - and those moments of IC tension and suffering are those more profound things.
In all seriousness, if I had to make a guess about the situation Annalesa is referring to, it was more frustrating because of the implausibility than the punishment. It's like being shot in the knee with a 9mm Beretta by a Japanese man in a Ronald McDonald costume on the corner of Church Street and South Road then being left to try and contend with that from an IC standpoint. Something conflict-heavy DID happen, but it's so baffling within the scope of theme that you're just... unsure what you're supposed to do with the information. With that said, the persons who engineered it were very new. A little bit of (OOC) understanding in either direction goes a long way.
...Slight exaggeration up there, of course, but hopefully it at least semi-explains the frustration aspect that Annalesa experienced, if I'm even right about which situation it was. It's less disliking bad things happening to the character and more staring at an alien situation and not being sure how to absorb it within the scope of theme.
All else aside - Leech: Don't get discouraged. Also, can I have a confession? Pleaaase? >.>
Edit: How did I turn Annalesa into Applesauce?... Fixed.
-
Applesauce
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:13 pm
It's cool, it's cool.Pixie wrote:Edit: How did I turn Annalesa into Applesauce?... Fixed.
Anywho, I pretty much totally agree with Dice. Having been a GI who was originally designed to literally be Count Rugen, but ended up being super lenient for what I perceived was the good of the game, I still felt rushed (by all sides, not just prosecution) to burn and move on, because otherwise escapes are a dime a dozen. The ease with which people would slip out of the Tower was nothing short of ridiculous, and when you did get someone burned it was only after days of OOC policy discussions and cnote reviews and log reviews and angry tells. I used to wonder why there aren't more Orderites, until I played an Orderite. And that's even with having the full support of an awesome Cardinal, I can't imagine either a Cardinal or GI trying to do anything without the other person 100% in their corner.
Ultimately, I can't speak for a relative comparison to the Reeves but I know for a fact there are IC and OOC checks against the Order, and no you can't just question or kill whoever you want without consequences.
I keep meaning to send my chars to confession, for big or small stuff, because I think that anyone with the guts to stick to an Orderite char deserves more than constant tells saying "you can't know this because I only told X and Y about it" while you have IC letters from perhaps X and Y about the matter. Not sure why I don't, maybe I just have trust issues =)
Bump, because I like my idea and want to test the waters again. Of course this system would be totally optional, not mandatory. It'd be like tossing out a character sheet to the Orderite RPers and being like 'Yo, wanna RP?'
Player of: Alexander ab Courtland
I sort of like it, and sort of don't. I wish it didn't make people write up stuff 'out of game" to be considered validly confessing to stuff, and I do worry that this would become viewed as mandatory... but as an extra option, I like it.
-
Haley Rose
I like it, but I also only think priests / priestesses / archbishops should have access to it. Confessions, to my knowledge, are not the perview of the Inquisition. That people are getting irritated about worries regarding Order brutality makes me really nervous to post this, lest I get lashed with anger and accused of contributing to negativity as well. I think all we're doing is trying to speak our opinions, and I don't think anyone wants to contribute to negativity, and if our opinions clash, I don't think we should be accused of doing so.
Now back to priests / priestesses being the only ones who can see listed confessions. Perhaps if the Inquisition does not have direct access to listed confessions, people will feel a bit more secure and safe. If the Inquisition wants to haul you into the "interrogation" chamber over fornication, to use an above example, then at least the player may feel a bit more at ease with reasonable negative consequences knowing that the Inquisitor found out via appropriate rp, not because an Inquisitor was bored and went browsing through sealed confessions that they should not have access to.
I do admit, however, that I have virtually no ooc trust that ooc information will remain so anymore, and I do recognize that this can shade my views on things. So I speak my own opinions, not facts. Once lost, trust can be very, very difficult to be regained. If ooc information crossover happens once, one can find themselves wondering if all negative rp is spurned by such. And that can make swallowing negative rp really, really hard. Because when it happens once, there's always that loss of trust that tells you that it may be happening again. And then negativity gets so stressful that the experience, which should be a growing and / or learning experience, just turns to ash in the metaphorical mouth. So I think that those who seem as if they're against negative consequences to confession aren't really against the Order itself or the actual consequences, but are more against and rather paranoid over finding themselves in an ic situation that was not entered through means of fair information gathering.
In response to conflict only spurning a character into growth, I'm not really certain conflict is always a good thing. I have played conflicted characters who were accused, rejected and eventually turned into characters I just let go of because an attempt at playing conflict just turned into not having any fun. Where is the line between avoiding conflict entirely and wading hip deep through too much of it? Finding that balance can also be difficult, thus spurning people into not wanting to deal with any.
In my case, I just avoid everything now and play out my stories by myself for the most part. Feeling slammed with the kind of situations mentioned above can really leave scars. So again, I do understand how negativity in all its facets can make a player wary of how things are being found out, how to play so that they're not accused of being attention horders or contributors to angst, etc. The actual negative situation isn't the issue in a lot of cases, it's what surrounds it that can make it upsetting to play through.
I've gotten off the initial topic though, which is yes. I agree that confession notes are a good idea. I like writing notes and keeping track of things. So long as they're not mandatory, and so long as the system doesn't replace actual confession rp when priests / priestesses are actually available, then I'd say go for it. Perhaps you can even add the name of the priest / priestess you spoke to, be it a real pc or a vnpc. Don't think priests would go sharing confessional secrets with one another, and it may help orderites keep track of who is confessing to who. Oocly they may see the confessions, but if they see that Lucy is coming to confession with Father Andrew a lot, they can ask Father Andrew about it rather than immediately knowing what she's telling him, since priests should and would, I should think, take those confessions seriously, not breaching that confidence unless Lucy was all, "Father, I'm a mage and I just killed 86 children, 4 dogs and my mother." I mean, in that case, call the entire Inquisition, Reeves and the pitchfork mob just for good measure. But barring extreme confessions...
Now back to priests / priestesses being the only ones who can see listed confessions. Perhaps if the Inquisition does not have direct access to listed confessions, people will feel a bit more secure and safe. If the Inquisition wants to haul you into the "interrogation" chamber over fornication, to use an above example, then at least the player may feel a bit more at ease with reasonable negative consequences knowing that the Inquisitor found out via appropriate rp, not because an Inquisitor was bored and went browsing through sealed confessions that they should not have access to.
I do admit, however, that I have virtually no ooc trust that ooc information will remain so anymore, and I do recognize that this can shade my views on things. So I speak my own opinions, not facts. Once lost, trust can be very, very difficult to be regained. If ooc information crossover happens once, one can find themselves wondering if all negative rp is spurned by such. And that can make swallowing negative rp really, really hard. Because when it happens once, there's always that loss of trust that tells you that it may be happening again. And then negativity gets so stressful that the experience, which should be a growing and / or learning experience, just turns to ash in the metaphorical mouth. So I think that those who seem as if they're against negative consequences to confession aren't really against the Order itself or the actual consequences, but are more against and rather paranoid over finding themselves in an ic situation that was not entered through means of fair information gathering.
In response to conflict only spurning a character into growth, I'm not really certain conflict is always a good thing. I have played conflicted characters who were accused, rejected and eventually turned into characters I just let go of because an attempt at playing conflict just turned into not having any fun. Where is the line between avoiding conflict entirely and wading hip deep through too much of it? Finding that balance can also be difficult, thus spurning people into not wanting to deal with any.
In my case, I just avoid everything now and play out my stories by myself for the most part. Feeling slammed with the kind of situations mentioned above can really leave scars. So again, I do understand how negativity in all its facets can make a player wary of how things are being found out, how to play so that they're not accused of being attention horders or contributors to angst, etc. The actual negative situation isn't the issue in a lot of cases, it's what surrounds it that can make it upsetting to play through.
I've gotten off the initial topic though, which is yes. I agree that confession notes are a good idea. I like writing notes and keeping track of things. So long as they're not mandatory, and so long as the system doesn't replace actual confession rp when priests / priestesses are actually available, then I'd say go for it. Perhaps you can even add the name of the priest / priestess you spoke to, be it a real pc or a vnpc. Don't think priests would go sharing confessional secrets with one another, and it may help orderites keep track of who is confessing to who. Oocly they may see the confessions, but if they see that Lucy is coming to confession with Father Andrew a lot, they can ask Father Andrew about it rather than immediately knowing what she's telling him, since priests should and would, I should think, take those confessions seriously, not breaching that confidence unless Lucy was all, "Father, I'm a mage and I just killed 86 children, 4 dogs and my mother." I mean, in that case, call the entire Inquisition, Reeves and the pitchfork mob just for good measure. But barring extreme confessions...
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests