Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Desiderya]

Look at it that way: When you brawl, there's no way of deciding who'll win, because in theory every move has a counter that's easier or more complicated to pull through. So in order to avoid that and to avoid railroading towards a pre-determined outcome (which is fine) you'd have to pre-determine or suggest some partial outcomes.

If you read closely there's nothing forced, because what Pieter basically describes in there is an attempt. It'd be up to the other party (in this case me), whether I want to have that happen or not. In regards to blocking if one party always dodges these attempts it's bad form, even without godmodding someone into an outcome, because it completely nullifies the other parties actions. It also gets tiresome.

If you're doing this kind of conflict with someone you're not, oocly, familiar, I highly suggest having an ooc chat on the side.

[Laria Raven]

I think, under "fairness", there is another element - trying as hard as you can to react to the spirit of what other people are trying to do. This means forgiving OOC errors, obviously(1), but also reading and reacting in the best spirit you can.

For example, if it's clear that someone is trying to portray their character as friendly, but coming across as over familiar, you have some options: 1) React with hostility, 2) react cautiously, and be a little uneasy, 3) react as if they had just been friendly.

There isn't a "right" answer, but I think that you should give as much as you reasonably can. The key word being "reasonably". And it's obviously affected by your character and their viewpoints and everything else - situation, prior interaction etc etc. But it's about being cooperative, and that means buying in, at least a little, to the story that the other person is trying to tell, as well as your own.

(1) Example: Inept Minmatar: Of course, she is a Sebiestor.
Ept Minmatar: She's a Brutor. Idiot.
Inept Minmatar: ((Oh *swearword*. Sorry, my mistake.))
The fair thing to do is strike the whole exchange, and either do it over or just move on. The unfair thing to do is to refuse that, have your character assume that Inept Minmatar Character is a spy, spread that around to everyone you know and then do a little dance.

[Shintoko Akahoshi]

Personally, I think it all comes down to control, as others have pointed out. If I say "Shin slams her fist into Anslo's nose, breaking it", I obviously don't give Anslo's player a chance to control his own character. If I say "Shin swings her fist at Anslo's nose", then I do give his player a chance to control him. If Shin and Anslo are lovers, and Anslo's player doesn't object, I can say "Shin kisses Anslo passionately" - I'm depriving Anslo's player of a little control of his character, but I'm doing so with the OOC understanding that it's okay with Anslo's player. It's a little shorthand to avoid the clunky "Shin leans in to kiss Anslo passionately" - "Anslo closes his eyes and returns the kiss" mechanism in places where it is appropriate.

[Anslol]

Personally, I think it all comes down to control, as others have pointed out. If I say "Shin slams her fist into Anslo's nose, breaking it", I obviously don't give Anslo's player a chance to control his own character. If I say "Shin swings her fist at Anslo's nose", then I do give his player a chance to control him. If Shin and Anslo are lovers, and Anslo's player doesn't object, I can say "Shin kisses Anslo passionately" - I'm depriving Anslo's player of a little control of his character, but I'm doing so with the OOC understanding that it's okay with Anslo's player. It's a little shorthand to avoid the clunky "Shin leans in to kiss Anslo passionately" - "Anslo closes his eyes and returns the kiss" mechanism in places where it is appropriate.

In all fairness, and just so it's out there, Anslo wouldn't duck from a kiss. He is a very very lonely person.

YOU OWE ME ANSLO(c)

* Anslol (p) flees ............................................\o\

EDIT: OK Real talk. I agree with Shin. I mean there's some thing's where you automatically know thing's are ok even if a choice isn't given (i.e. relationships). For things like fights or whatever, it should be discussed between both parties and ONLY both parties. I feel like IC fights fist to fist are meant for an audience and to entertain people. We're actors and audience all in one.

So, if I wanted to have Anslo beat Saede or Arthas to a pulp for :reasons:, I would talk to them before hand before I even HINTED at a fight to any other person. It's all about knowing each other and being on the same page OOCly to create an IC brawl or event that entertains everyone else. Eve is about a lot of things, but one of those things are stories. What good is your story if you hoard it all to yourself?

[Desiderya]

Anslo, there's this thing like appearing too desperate.... 

And I agree with both Shintoko and Laria, when you've got the OOC understanding right, it's okay to start depriving a bit of control. In the end it defaults to Laria's point of 'Trying to play cooperatively and keep the best interests of yourself and your partner(s) in mind.'. If you're trying to play against someone they're not bound to enjoy it, or come back for more. :p

[Anslol]

Anslo, there's this thing like appearing too desperate.... 

And I agree with both Shintoko and Laria, when you've got the OOC understanding right, it's okay to start depriving a bit of control. In the end it defaults to Laria's point of 'Trying to play cooperatively and keep the best interests of yourself and your partner(s) in mind.'. If you're trying to play against someone they're not bound to enjoy it, or come back for more. :p

YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME

[Lyn Farel]

Blocking is an improv term; it means squelching another actor instead of going with.

I'll give a fighting example as they're popular.

Kat swings a fist at Makkal, Makkal easily ducks it.
Kat attempts to trip Makkal, Makkal steps away.
Kat tries to catch Makkal in a bear hug, Makkal slips out.

It's the opposite of godmodding. Instead of forcing actions on a character, you render another characters actions against you completely useless.

Fair or unfair?

A little unfair to me. Who knows, maybe I actually want my character to be punched/grabbed whatever. You can never know for sure.

[Morwen Lagann]

Makkal is referring to two different posts in each line:

Kat swings a fist at Makkal (action 1 posted by Kat), Makkal easily ducks it. (action 2 posted by Makkal)
Kat attempts to trip Makkal (action 1 posted by Kat), Makkal steps away. (action 2 posted by Makkal)
Kat tries to catch Makkal in a bear hug (action 1 posted by Kat), Makkal slips out. (action 2 posted by Makkal)

[Lyn Farel]

Uhm yes, I read it too fast.

I thought it was telling that you try to punch someone and then directly add that you miss. Unless you have a very good reason for it (like being drunk, missing intentionally and so on).

[Silas Vitalia]

I kind of go back and forth on things sometimes, if Katrina is still reading this when I took S. physically to your Lounge, I was literally putting her life in your hands, and if you had done some unconsentual violence I would have had to be ok with it.  (it's why I was asking quite pointedly about security and gaurantees).  I tend not to take my character physically anywhere where there are not IC assurances or she's not in control.   Other people's channels can be dangerous

[Merdaneth]

I find fairness is one of those things where everyone has their own definition and this is simply an attempt to see how everyone defines and applies the concept.

Fairness is, by definition, subjective.

From my thesis:

Fairness is a subjective judgement; each person determines for himself what he feels to be fair. Judgements of what is fair and what not, when looking from a intrapersonal perspective, have been termed attitudes or dispositions. These judgements of fairness can be extended beyond a single person and applied to a group of people. Such interpersonal evaluations of fairness are known as are known as norms. I would like to define justice as a specific kind of fairness judgements, namely the fairness judgements that involve norms. Justice is if someone gets what norms say that he or she deserves. Injustice is if someone gets what the norms say he or she doesn’t deserve or does not get what the norms say he or she does deserve.

[Sakura Nihil]

"Fair RP" to me comes down to two things, consequences and godmoding:

* Sakura Nihil shoots XXX in the chest with a three-round burst from her pistol

Totally bullshit godmoding, never going to happen.  For obvious reasons.

* Sakura Nihil throws a bottle at XXX

Probably okay, especially as it doesn't say "which hits XXX in the head", or something to that nature.  It gives the target a chance to act, to have their bodyguards respond, etc.

* Sakura Nihil lifts XXX's chin up with a finger and gives them a soft kiss

I think this is okay, even potentially on some random person.  The prime reason is that a kiss leaves no permanent harm on the recipient.  Whether it's accepted or not, totally up to the player in question, just like RL.

In short, prodding a character to action is acceptable in my book, provided you don't choose how to respond for them.

[BloodBird]

* Sakura Nihil lifts XXX's chin up with a finger and gives them a soft kiss

I think this is okay, even potentially on some random person.  The prime reason is that a kiss leaves no permanent harm on the recipient.  Whether it's accepted or not, totally up to the player in question, just like RL.

In short, prodding a character to action is acceptable in my book, provided you don't choose how to respond for them.

This depends completely on who you kiss, or whatever, and if that character would allow that action to take place. For my own part I can tell you that if my toon showed up at any kind of party or event and random characters he don't know to well, or worse, characters he knows of but don't like, tried to kiss him, he'd block the attempt as well as he could. There are several other examples that could be made, but just because an action is benevolent or kind don't mean the other party want them to happen.

Unless you have an OOC chat going on the side and/or a prearranged understanding that the action performed is fine, it can still be seen as godmodding when you do pretty much anything that the opposing party get's no say in, you can not guarantee that the player behind that toon want him/her/it to be doing that, or seen to be of the mindset that the action was acceptable. I somehow doubt that, say Merdaneth, would be to happy to see his toon openly accepting or enjoying a passionate kiss from a random stranger, especially if said stranger was Minmatar or Gallente, for instance. I could obviously be wrong, but I'm confident I got it rather right in this case, and that the IC results of this are undesired.

[Pieter Tuulinen]

You have to be a BIT careful not to get too bogged down in permission seeking, though. Generally speaking it works best if each writer makes one decision per paragraph - usually the result of an action attempted on them by someone else - and then poses a new action to another of the writers involved.

If you seek permission for your reaction to an action then the writing will get completely baroque and recursive and it will take HOURS to do anything!

[Sakura Nihil]

You have to be a BIT careful not to get too bogged down in permission seeking, though. Generally speaking it works best if each writer makes one decision per paragraph - usually the result of an action attempted on them by someone else - and then poses a new action to another of the writers involved.

If you seek permission for your reaction to an action then the writing will get completely baroque and recursive and it will take HOURS to do anything!

Pieter gets it.  It's about spontaneity, the kind that doesn't leave any lingering effect.  First off, some sort of passionate scene like that doesn't happen in public that often, and second, when it does, the two parties are usually pretty fond of each other.

However, let's say that out of the blue, some Gallente decides to plant one on an Amarrian that's totally not receptive of the gesture.  I would hope the party in question would tend to use good judgement, and do something like "XXX leans in close to XXX's face", to give them a heads up... but what if they just go for it?  The unwilling recipient would likely back off and either smack them / punch them / have them tossed out.  The party in question, if in public, would probably be made fun of, and might even get wardec'd or something by the recipient for trying something so insulting.

Content generation!  And really, who in a few years down the road would even remember such an incident, anyways?  I can remember some really out-there stuff that happened at La Maison, that thankfully few of us remember.  Time heals these types of wounds... as opposed to knife wounds, or scars, or things of that nature.  Those are the serious kinds of godmoding maneuvers that should be watched out for, dilligently.