Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Synthia on 18 Jun 2013, 13:42
-
Something mentioned in a few threads recently, relates to people expressing unhappiness that actions their character has taken in the past keep being brought up, in discussions on the IGS or the Summit.
Example:
Character A says in YC 113: "I am an agent of the Guardian Angels"
Character B says in YC 115: "Character A, are you still an Angel or is that passe?"
Player A says "Why can't B just let it go?" or similar, occasionally accuses B of holding a grudge OOC.
Player A is unhappy that their actions in YC113 are mentioned in YC115.
Occasionally, community pressure is put on Player B, to express disapproval, and suggest that B should "let it go".
My question is, why should B do such a thing ?
If character B dislikes character A, because of A's actions, and A has never apologised, or made amends, or publically recanted their previous position, why should character B not bring up A's past misdeeds ?
If B is forced by community pressure to "drop it", is that not against the principle of letting players play their character as they wish ? almost god-moding ?
If A has their misdeeds forgiven, does that not turn them into a Mary Sue ? Where they can do anything, and people will still love them?
For the record, several times on this forum, players of CTCS have been accused of holding OOC grudges, due to mentioning past events. To the best of my knowledge, no CTCS member holds any OOC grudges.
-
Something mentioned in a few threads recently, relates to people expressing unhappiness that actions their character has taken in the past keep being brought up, in discussions on the IGS or the Summit.
Example:
Character A says in YC 113: "I am an agent of the Guardian Angels"
Character B says in YC 115: "Character A, are you still an Angel or is that passe?"
Player A says "Why can't B just let it go?" or similar, occasionally accuses B of holding a grudge OOC.
Player A is unhappy that their actions in YC113 are mentioned in YC115.
Occasionally, community pressure is put on Player B, to express disapproval, and suggest that B should "let it go".
My question is, why should B do such a thing ?
If character B dislikes character A, because of A's actions, and A has never apologised, or made amends, or publically recanted their previous position, why should character B not bring up A's past misdeeds ?
If B is forced by community pressure to "drop it", is that not against the principle of letting players play their character as they wish ? almost god-moding ?
If A has their misdeeds forgiven, does that not turn them into a Mary Sue ? Where they can do anything, and people will still love them?
For the record, several times on this forum, players of CTCS have been accused of holding OOC grudges, due to mentioning past events. To the best of my knowledge, no CTCS member holds any OOC grudges.
Player A should suck it up and live with their choices and quit bitching and try to change the situation by actual gameplay. That is the charm of EVE. Everything you did, affects everything you will do. So if they were a vicious Pirate they shouldn't expect a special treatment if someone in the living and breathing game world asks them about it.
If I'd change Vince to a humanitarian with a cause in the future, I would fully expect people to call him on his past actions and crimes and doubt his motives as he is an Angel Cartel slaver and a human trafficker now. I'd expect I'd have to work my ass off to IC convince there's been actual change and not expect handvavium to make it disappear.
-
As long as it is all IC, past deeds are fair game in my opinion. The character made their bed and has to sleep in it. If Character A was a heartless pirate (or whatever) during their first year or so of playing and then did a complete turn around and became a 'face', they can't simply erase the past. Especially not when there are forum posts, log files, and other records of their actions. If they really are trying to turn a new leaf, all the more power to them, but they cannot expect people to simply forget.
In just the month I have played EVE, the setting does seem to play upon the 'by your actions you will be known' kind of perspective; people are going to call you on the things you have done and as long as it is IC let it happen.
-
CTCS?
Words and deed have consequences. Characters in this game get in trouble because there are *rumors* about them, let alone them posting on the IGS about their hanging out with Angels.
That said, I see no reason to not deal with a possible OOC grudge OOCly. The problem is more that people deal with these things in a non-constructive way.
As long as it is all IC...
Nothing is all IC.
There might be players who never interact OOC but they're not going to be the ones posting or lurking in Backstage.
-
As is often the case, there is sometimes be friction ooc for kicking sand in someone's face IC.
But as in real life, other people can only bother you as much as you let them. ;)
-
Well, for many players (that I have observed) the odds of people bringing up events from the characters past that a player dislikes to have mentioned, is largely dependent on the OOC relations between players.
Well liked *players* are forgiven for actions by their character must faster than players who are less popular.
For well-liked players, other players have their characters make up convenient reasons to heal an IC rift, while with less-liked players the same players will make up reasons to enlarge the rift.
EVE RP is ruled by OOC considerations as much as it is ruled by IC considerations, its better to not have to many illusions about such things.
-
+1 to what Merdaneth said. Not saying I think it's good how it is, but that's how things are.
-
Who cares!
Blow up their towers and ships! :yar:
-
Well, for many players (that I have observed) the odds of people bringing up events from the characters past that a player dislikes to have mentioned, is largely dependent on the OOC relations between players.
Well liked *players* are forgiven for actions by their character must faster than players who are less popular.
For well-liked players, other players have their characters make up convenient reasons to heal an IC rift, while with less-liked players the same players will make up reasons to enlarge the rift.
EVE RP is ruled by OOC considerations as much as it is ruled by IC considerations, its better to not have to many illusions about such things.
I've found this to be unfortunately true. It shouldn't really be the case, but it might not be able to be helped.
fortunately being EVE, this:
Who cares!
Blow up their towers and ships! :yar:
Is always an option ♥
-
As long as it is all IC...
Nothing is all IC.
There might be players who never interact OOC but they're not going to be the ones posting or lurking in Backstage.
This is true. Might sound naive of me, but I assume (unless there's clear indication otherwise) that comments, jests, jeers, and whatnot are driven by character not the player.
That said, I do realize that OOC stuff does creep in at times.
-
I dunno, Ive always disliked a lot of retconning when it comes to peoples IC pasts.
The really special thing about EVE RP is the ability to create a story stretching over the years and that choices have consequences.
Trying to wipe out someones history in the past kinda does away with those things, in my opinion.
-
Well, for many players (that I have observed) the odds of people bringing up events from the characters past that a player dislikes to have mentioned, is largely dependent on the OOC relations between players.
Well liked *players* are forgiven for actions by their character must faster than players who are less popular.
For well-liked players, other players have their characters make up convenient reasons to heal an IC rift, while with less-liked players the same players will make up reasons to enlarge the rift.
EVE RP is ruled by OOC considerations as much as it is ruled by IC considerations, its better to not have to many illusions about such things.
Echo chambers and all that.
/me is obsessed with echo chambers and already knows it, thanks.
-
I think there are a couple good points here on either 'side'. I don't think they are mutually exclusive, and I don't think the negative ramifications have any easy answer - but I think certain approaches work better than others.
1) The history of your character can and should stay with you. I don't pretend that Silver was never a Sansha loyalist (though I'm happy to put all kinds of spin on it IC). He was, and if someone IC wants to call him on it whatever their motivation is then fair enough - and people do, from time to time. It is part of the character. I would not pressure those people OOC to drop it because it isn't fair or anything like that - it is totally legit. I would also hope that other people wouldn't pressure those people.
2) The other issue here is related to the motivation for bringing these things up IC. 'But Silver' I hear you say, 'Didn't you just say that it is fair whatever the motivation?' I did say that. However, there are certainly cases where OOC feeling leaks into IC. Things like this (while entirely legitimate IC) can be a symptom of an OOC problem - even while being legitimate in themselves. In general, if you feel like that is what is happening, I'd recommending getting in touch with the person, and seeing if you can sort things out or at least make sure there isn't an OOC issue.
Back when I was in EM, we had a sort of rule - I don't remember specifically (and someone from EM can probably quote it) - but it was along the lines of never try to solve an OOC problem IC. It's a very immersionist alliance, but the situation where they would 100% of the time encourage people to talk OOC would be to resolve any kind of OOC problem or miscommunication - even if it was just a quick 'Hey, this is OOC, just want to let you know my character just really doesn't like x that your character did, but it's all IC, and OOC we're cool'.
Sometimes you can't resolve it, sometimes one or both sides don't particularly want to resolve it - that's why I say that there isn't always an easy answer. In those situation, I still wouldn't say that OOC pressure is appropriate when the issue is this specific behavior. It's obviously a bit different if we start getting into the territory of harassment or anything like that. If all someone does is call out your character's past, it might be annoying, but it is your character's past. Ignore them, would generally be my advice, but it can of course be a bit difficult.
-
Personally, I don't log into EVE just to drag icons in and out of my hanger, watch timers, and blow up little red crosses on my screens.
I log on because there are other humans there to interact with. Makkal does her thing, but I also do mine. I don't feel the need to be buddies with everyone, but I like to maintain cordial relations. And I don't want people to feel that Makkal reacting to someone in a negative or unpleasant manner (jokes to the contrary aside, there are characters Makkal dislikes and wishes harm upon) is the player acting out some sort of personal grievance.
Likewise, there are good and bad ways to handle such a (possible) occurrence. Snarking about the player OOC or complaining to the board about the PC's behavior being the result of the player's rustled jummies isn't a good way to solve interplayer problems.
-
I suppose this really comes down to one thing: be true to your characters. OOC I love several people Aldy has big grudges against: Vincent, Silas, and Karmilla are some examples. There are a rare few people I dislike OOC that I make Aldy keep cordial relations with because nothing has happened to their relationship IC.
Of course, if some people do not keep to these strict IC/OOC separation standards, no one can force them. I personally don't like the idea of making IC decisions based on OOC desires, but it happens and in the end people play this game to have fun, not be bound to a needy fictional character's limitations.
-
:cube: Aldrith :cube:
Now come to Khanid...
-
:cube: Aldrith :cube:
Now come to Khanid...
+1
Join. Us.
We have cake!
-
The art is in the justification... which falls upon Player A.
I'm frequently a Player B because Halete is an unrefined bitch and will use anything she can get her claws on - and why shouldn't she, it's the character. I hate metagaming and retconning with a great passion.
However I'm also often in the position of playing Halete defending herself against criticisms about the type of company she has enjoyed in the past. I don't feel particularly threatened by this and just deal with it because choices in life have consequences. The same is true for fictional life and in EVE.
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
I'm working on this :twisted:
-
If people bring up stuff from my past that I don't want them to bring up, I generally just ignore them until they stop bringing it up.
This solution has literally never not worked for me.
-
I'm told that I get kind of a free ride through Eve because my character is a popular one, but I really don't try to weasel out of consequences for his actions because of it - that's actually anathema to the character concept inherently.
As Makkal said, I really enjoy interacting with people. I suppose that's why I tried to make a character who would be able to interact with largest number of people in a way that goes deeper than rhetoric and arguments.
-
If people bring up stuff from my past that I don't want them to bring up, I generally just ignore them until they stop bringing it up.
This solution has literally never not worked for me.
SO HOW ABOUT THEM BLOOD RAIDERS, EH?
...We need a trollface emoticon.
-
SO HOW ABOUT THEM BLOOD RAIDERS, EH?
...We need a trollface emoticon.
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120613232624/halo/images/9/9f/Trollface_emoticon.png)
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
Some small part of me feels guilty whenever I read this complaint.
I'm told that I get kind of a free ride through Eve because my character is a popular one...
I've been told the same. Usually by people who don't RP with Makkal.
...but I really don't try to weasel out of consequences for his actions because of it...
Makkal now spends 90% of her time in Syndicate (NPC null) tackling the occasional pirate or Goon. This makes her distant and irrelevant for most PCs. :s
-
Here's the thing: There isn't something wrong with someone being 'popular' - which is a way of saying 'well liked' but with vaguely negative connotations.
People look at other players who are better liked, or whose characters are better liked, and perceive an unfair situation. Maybe it is unfair, but the solution isn't to complain that people like someone else better than you. Whether that's true or not, and whether it is fair or not, complaining about it probably isn't going to help things. It isn't those character's jobs to be less well liked, and it isn't really everyone else's job to like you more. Plus, chances are there everyone is unpopular with someone - but there are really a fairly high number of RPers these days. You'll probably find a crowd where you'll fit in.
-
I am not sure that Merdaneth was complaing about popularity being unfair. I think his point was only that players tend to be a lot more forgetful and easy with characters belonging to players they like OOC.
That's more something endemic to OOC/IC social relations in RP.
-
I'm told that I get kind of a free ride through Eve because my character is a popular one...
I've been told the same. Usually by people who don't RP with Makkal.
...but I really don't try to weasel out of consequences for his actions because of it...
Makkal now spends 90% of her time in Syndicate (NPC null) tackling the occasional pirate or Goon. This makes her distant and irrelevant for most PCs. :s
In space, perhaps.
But I guarantee that there are plenty of people for whom neither Makkal nor Pieter are anything resembling "irrelevant", purely because of non-space RP.
Grudges and the like are a natural part of human behavior and learning - we often remember a lesson learned through a sour experience better than one learned through a pleasant one. Most people don't intentionally put their hand down on a hot stove after the first time they try it. If you've had a bad experience with someone, you're not going to forget it quickly - but you might be inclined to pass over it as an isolated incident if you've had a number of good experiences with that person.
Having grudges and acting on them are two different things, of course. While I would find someone who doesn't act on them to be somewhat normal, someone who never held any grudges in the first place would seem a bit weird to me unless there were a good reason for it.
-
I simply give 0 fucks, which translates into Anslo giving 0 fucks.
*in a big crowd of people*
"So did you guy's know Anslo did [insert not-so-nice action here." (while Anslo is present)
"Yep, I did. Deal with it."
(http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p43/xXCrocmonXx/HatersGonnaHate.gif)
People can bring up what they want tbh. If it's a blatant lie, it'll be rather obvious to people. For instance, "Anslo bled my entire family for fun three years ago and now he says he's a nice guy!? He's a liar!!"
wat
-
I simply give 0 fucks, which translates into Anslo giving 0 fucks.
Role-playing, what is?
-
What is what?
-
What is what?
Baby don't hurt me. Don't hurt me. No more.
-
What is what?
Baby don't hurt me. Don't hurt me. No more.
Get out.
-
I am not sure that Merdaneth was complaing about popularity being unfair. I think his point was only that players tend to be a lot more forgetful and easy with characters belonging to players they like OOC.
OOC popularity is simply something you'll have to consider when you plan your character's career.
If you piss off a CEO in OOC chat, and then proceed to apply for said corp a month later, be prepared to be rejected even though characters with a much more checkered past than your own are accepted. OOC trumps IC.
If you switch from Amarr loyalists, to pirate, to Republic loyalist, to Sansha loyalist, to Blood loyalist and then apply for your original Amarr loyalist corp again, and you were/are well liked by the members, then you'll get a token 'repentance' assignment and are quickly accepted back into the ranks again. OOC trumps IC.
IC considerations are important of course, but IC defections, betrayals and similar stuff are easily forgiven, while OOC defections and betrayals are not.
If you make few OOC friends, and many OOC enemies, better be prepared that any sudden changes in your IC playstyle will not be forgiven easily and any attempts at retcons will be hindered by people coming out of the woodwork pointing them out. Your character may suddenly feel 'locked' into a certain playstyle if you lack sufficient OOC support.
My only issue tends to be that many players justify such things by saying 'hey, I'm just playing my character'. In my opinion, just because the reasoning is IC, doesn't mean the motivation is.
-
Completely.
Most people tend to consider that friendship takes precedence over principles, be it ingame or IRL in general. People will come to the defense of a friend being wrong even if they know it, or just don't want to hear about it. People are mostly subjective, not objective. That's how people work.
It is the same with OOC friendships in any RP community. OOC friendships take precedence over IC reasonings and principles. I personally think it is rather unfortunate since I happen to think completely differently, either IRL or in Eve, but at the very least, it's not such a big deal since it reflects on how it is IRL so it feels more or less realistic... Though less when OOC reasons start to bleed over IC ones, but well.
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
I must confess that there are times when the fact that Reppy's past Cartel associations (even if she never shot anyone) never being brought up or posing any kind of problem for anyone slightly... weird, for want of a better term. Mind you, there are a bunch of people who don't like her, but they don't have to deal with her, so... yeah.
I personally have never given people a free ride based on OOC stuff. Vince and I have had some spectacular IC shit go down (which had to be negotiated OOC eventually because it got so brutal), but we still got on well afterwards. Reppy's never going to let Aldy near her again after his self-immolation craziness. Anyone associated with the Toasters in any way gets a personal Exterminate On Sight (if possible) order. She's a complete ass to Tibby every opportunity she gets in Summit, even though he's awesome.
-
Sami gives people a lot of shit for who they hang out with. OOC/IC friendships be damned. Even Pieter's taken flack from her.
-
Sami gives people a lot of shit for who they hang out with. OOC/IC friendships be damned. Even Pieter's taken flack from her.
Shit, even Anslo's a little scared of Sami given the stories >_>
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
This is mostly because the corps that were involved in many of those wardecs got busy with FW from what I can tell.
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
It's still here.
I-RED is disliked or regarded at neutrally (best case scenario) by literally every major faction and subfaction in current EVE-RP politics. I literally cannot name a single entity that doesn't have some shit to say about us, excepting Ishukone ofc. No matter how hard any of us try to heal the rift between us and another faction (and believe me, I'd made it my goal to), or how hard we attempt to take part in RP politics with a gentle hand, we still get shit on regularly. Even when we're trying to do something good.
Caldari (especially these guys), Gallente, Minmatar, Amarr, Pirates, Humanitarians. None of them like us.
Sometimes, it doesn't matter what you do... you're going to be the Black Sheep. You won't be liked. But then, that's the nature of EVE. There are no friendly faces.
Maybe it's because we as a long term alliance have tried to find a friendly faction in so many places, that all of them point to the last time we hung out with their enemies. Try to be nice to the Amarr, Minmatar hate us. Try to be nice to Minmatar, Amarr hate us. Same with Caldari, and Gallente.
Even more amusing is that for the longest time we were some of the only Caldari saying anything about Heth, doing anything about Heth, and then when it's suddenly popular to go against Heth... we're told we weren't there for any of it, and that we just hid in syndicate the whole time. What the fuck?
Meh. EVE politics are baloney.
EDIT: Struck out some of the blind rage and inaccuracies caused by it. Viewpoint explained in a bit more detail here. (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=4999.msg80913#msg80913)
-
Never forgive, never forget. :twisted:
-
Sami gives people a lot of shit for who they hang out with. OOC/IC friendships be damned. Even Pieter's taken flack from her.
And she's ruthless about pushing the issue when events prove her right.
-
There was a time when who you 'hung out with' IC did have ramifications... wardecs, and consequences.
I see much much less of that these days.
Hugglefest politics gives you +10 forgiveness armor for all IC actions in modern EVE.
Well, to be fair, I have been adhering to it pretty hardcore.
I also virtually never have anyone to RP with as a result.
One does lead to the other, all.
-
In my experience it really depends on what you're retconning and why, and how you played your character during the time you're looking to retcon. If you were in the Amarr militia splashing all over the IGS about how Minmatar are subhuman, expect Minmatar characters to hold a grudge; but if you were in the Amarr militia because you rolled an Amarr character and decided once you got into RP that the faction wasn't for you, Minmatar players/characters are more likely to accept your 'road to Damascus' conversion. I got into a Sansha aligned corp as a two-week old character and player, and never had anyone be a dick about not accepting my 'youthful mistake' explanation; I suspect things might have been different if I'd been publicly RPing about sticking TCMCs into POWS.
Holding IC grudges for OOC reasons does happen, but often players assume that's the reason for the holding of a grudge without looking at the differences between how their character behaved and how other, "forgiven" characters behaved.
The closer our characters are to ourselves, the harder it is to see how their behavior might be perceived by others - and the more likely we are to see a held grudge as 'unfair' and OOC.
-
I-RED is disliked or regarded at neutrally (best case scenario) by literally every major faction and subfaction in current EVE-RP politics.
Do tell?
-
I-RED: Not as hated as TS-F.
When Makkal joined RDC, many people expressed approval of her choice (or confusion about a Khanid joining a Caldari corp) but no one badmouthed I-RED. Few people have felt the need to attack Ishukone or IRED when speaking with her, but that's probably 1) Makkal is a foreign worker, and 2) if Kat is around she's always the target of choice.
-
I don't personally see a long term dislike of I-RED, either.
Shin, of course, is negatively disposed towards them, but that's mainly because she's ex-O-SYN (who were screwed by Ishukone) and I-RED are pro-Ishukone. :D
-
Without as much frothing rage and ranting, let me explain a bit more:
OOC, many people enjoy I-RED and seem to respect us as a group. IC, it's a pretty different story. Granted, as someone who's been handling diplomacy for us for the past year, I've seen more of the failures (and successes) behind closed doors than most of the line pilots and outsiders have... but I stand by what I said.
I'm not saying EVERYBODY IN EVE HATES US. I'm not even saying every player group dislikes us IC. I'm saying that every major faction and subfaction we've dealt with has at least one major and influential group that seriously dislike us. From a diplomatic standpoint, that causes issues when the big boy on the block says no to I-RED. Smaller ones tend to follow suit.
Gallente: Villore Accords
Minmatar: Electus Matari
Amarr: CVA
Caldari: various Patriot corporations that seems to be birthing and dying at a fast rate
Pirates: uhm.. all of them?
Granted, the subfactions like Khanid and Ammatar we haven't really dealt with directly. I should admit that I was wrong to include them. You have to understand that we have a history of working against/for the interests of every major faction at least one point in time, and this is still reflected in today's diplomatic mess.
What Silas said still holds true today. You pay for who you associate with in the end. If you associate with everyone, you lose support from everyone. Pick a side and stick to it, is my advice.
-
What Silas said still holds true today. You pay for who you associate with in the end. If you associate with everyone, you lose support from everyone. Pick a side and stick to it, is my advice.
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f299/Umbrax3/CaptAmer_213x50.jpg)
I'm not sure I'd say 'pick a side' but I might go with 'pick a consistent viewpoint and be clear about it.'
You don't have to operate within the lines the majority of people fall into. It's okay to carve out your own little space but people need to know exactly what it is.
-
For CVA, you did screw it up yourselves no ? Anyway, that was an interesting conflict.
I mean, my character probably has enemies in all factions as well. Probably the same for a lot of characters.
Anyway, my character rather likes I-RED.
-
Well, the problem a lot of Caldari - and others - have with I-RED is that it largely seems like you've made sure to stick a knife in everyone's back. Yes, you've been fair to everyone, perhaps, but they're still not going to be happy. For the Caldari in particular, shooting STPRO members while bluing Gallente militia corps is something that's going to take a LONG time to live down, even if you've changed policy since.
As for my character, and me, I like grudges. I like making people furious OOC and IC with me (perhaps a bit too much, at times) and then using that anger to make them look bad, or to motivate them into thinking the wrong thing or doing something stupid. In fairness, I also like making some people happy or well off. I suppose I'm simply trying to avoid emotional boredom with the game.
-
Well, the problem a lot of Caldari - and others - have with I-RED is that it largely seems like you've made sure to stick a knife in everyone's back. Yes, you've been fair to everyone, perhaps, but they're still not going to be happy. For the Caldari in particular, shooting STPRO members while bluing Gallente militia corps is something that's going to take a LONG time to live down, even if you've changed policy since.
(http://i.imgur.com/iwHk6nm.gif)
I'm well aware of what caused the current trend, but thank you for taking the time to post!
-
There's still some meat on dem bones. Keep whipping!
Long story short, RP meta, to me, is as valid an attack as a war declaration or posturing structure bash; transients, tourists and general onlookers will judge your words, but the real value is in how you back them up.
I haven't experienced much of the oft mentioned 'TS-F hatred', though a lot of Sol's rp happens through the barrel of a star ship turret (with occasional barbs thrown at IGS). With the I-RED stuff, Gallente-gate (Fw-gate? Standings-gate?) will probably live in Sol's memory as long as she does. The main issue is she's unlikely to bring it up in conversation due to aforementioned - talk to comrades, shoot everything else - modus operandi.
Ael is pretty friendly to I-RED due to good encounters diplomatically, the fact its members looked past her Intaki heritage and prior Federation citizenship pretty easily, and the Patriot-Liberal differences place Practicals nicely in the 'competitor of my competitor is not to be trusted but can come around for tea' territory that feeds good rp. It is a shame I haven't had more chance to interact with all the various Caldari sub-factions (outside Dragonaurs because - immigrant citizen and racism don't mix well).
At the end of the day, IMO, if you're getting a strong positive or negative reactions, and your members aren't leaving in droves, you're doing something right. The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about.
-
At the end of the day, IMO, if you're getting a strong positive or negative reactions, and your members aren't leaving in droves, you're doing something right. The only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about.
This! While it can often frustrate me personally as a diplomat and diplomacy roleplayer to continue being hampered by things I was never around for (and probably could have prevented if I was diplo back then), I think we as an alliance carve out a pretty nice niche for ourselves. Especially since we're doing well OOC where we are, and seem to have some really good stuff going on.
-
It's kind of funny reading this stuff about I-RED, as (with zero OOC justification, and she's yet to tell me her IC justification) Reppy tends to dismiss I-RED as being vaguely fluffy and ignorable. Some nice people there, but really, not that important.
-
It's kind of funny reading this stuff about I-RED, as (with zero OOC justification, and she's yet to tell me her IC justification) Reppy tends to dismiss I-RED as being vaguely fluffy and ignorable. Some nice people there, but really, not that important.
:cube:
-
It's kind of funny reading this stuff about I-RED, as (with zero OOC justification, and she's yet to tell me her IC justification) Reppy tends to dismiss I-RED as being vaguely fluffy and ignorable. Some nice people there, but really, not that important.
This.
Who wants to dedicate serious energy to disliking I-RED, really?
-
It's kind of funny reading this stuff about I-RED, as (with zero OOC justification, and she's yet to tell me her IC justification) Reppy tends to dismiss I-RED as being vaguely fluffy and ignorable. Some nice people there, but really, not that important.
This.
Who wants to dedicate serious energy to disliking I-RED, really?
Too busy devoting all available hate towards TS-F and Nation. :P
-
EVE being EVE, manipulating OOC and IC is easy enough.
It will be all your own fault if someone screws you over for being gullible.
It is not paranoia if they are coming to get you.
Did a small foray into Minmatar roleplay with a disposable alt, didn't take that long to be friends with people that hate Lallaras guts. Just having small mix of helplessness, eagerness and amiability works wonders.
-
Did a small foray into Minmatar roleplay with a disposable alt, didn't take that long to be friends with people that hate Lallaras guts. Just having small mix of helplessness, eagerness and amiability works wonders.
Always a fun game. Never put much effort into doing anything like that, but it was amusing on the occasions I've done it.
-
*
CTCS?
Words and deed have consequences. Characters in this game get in trouble because there are *rumors* about them, let alone them posting on the IGS about their hanging out with Angels.
That said, I see no reason to not deal with a possible OOC grudge OOCly. The problem is more that people deal with these things in a non-constructive way.
CTCS = Church of the Crimson Saviour. Our corporation.
[admin]Havo wuz here.[/admin]
-
Well, the problem a lot of Caldari - and others - have with I-RED is that it largely seems like you've made sure to stick a knife in everyone's back. Yes, you've been fair to everyone, perhaps, but they're still not going to be happy. For the Caldari in particular, shooting STPRO members while bluing Gallente militia corps is something that's going to take a LONG time to live down, even if you've changed policy since.
(http://i.imgur.com/iwHk6nm.gif)
I'm well aware of what caused the current trend, but thank you for taking the time to post!
That horse is faking it, I swear! :D
Anyway, I have no OOC grudge against I-RED, even if I thought the Luminaire thing was a giant pile of [REDACTED] with [NO, SERIOUSLY, NO POSTING THAT] topped by sprinkles of [WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?] and that certain devs should [DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT SAYING THAT].
On the IC side, my character is simply getting tired of certain Caldari who are "elsewhere" when it comes to the war going on like they are the arbiters of all goodness and justice.
-
Well, the problem a lot of Caldari - and others - have with I-RED is that it largely seems like you've made sure to stick a knife in everyone's back. Yes, you've been fair to everyone, perhaps, but they're still not going to be happy. For the Caldari in particular, shooting STPRO members while bluing Gallente militia corps is something that's going to take a LONG time to live down, even if you've changed policy since.
(http://i.imgur.com/iwHk6nm.gif)
I'm well aware of what caused the current trend, but thank you for taking the time to post!
That horse is faking it, I swear! :D
Anyway, I have no OOC grudge against I-RED, even if I thought the Luminaire thing was a giant pile of [REDACTED] with [NO, SERIOUSLY, NO POSTING THAT] topped by sprinkles of [WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?] and that certain devs should [DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT SAYING THAT].
On the IC side, my character is simply getting tired of certain Caldari who are "elsewhere" when it comes to the war going on like they are the arbiters of all goodness and justice.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I keep thinking I got your post, but then I'm like... no I'm still confused.
Anyways, IC is IC.
-
Caldari: various Patriot corporations that seems to be birthing and dying at a fast rate
LDIS has been around a while and generally opposed I-RED in political RP, to include decrying their presence in Providence, arguing that the State needed them in Black Rise. (Which puts LDIS in an odd position today.) That was the foil, Ishukone vs Lai Dai, competitors.
Or would you prefer: "Caldari Should Be One Monolithic Entity, Not Competing Methods To The Same Goal"
Even more amusing is that for the longest time we were some of the only Caldari saying anything about Heth, doing anything about Heth, and then when it's suddenly popular to go against Heth... we're told we weren't there for any of it, and that we just hid in syndicate the whole time. What the fuck?
I realize I am responding to a rant, but bullshit. I argued with Van Cleef, Svetlana Scarlet, Kyoko Sakoda, etc about the extent of Heth's power in 2008 (I was proven wrong in the past 6 months) and back-referenced the IGS conversations when it was brought up again for on the order of 3 years. I-RED was another "loyal-opposition" entity, opposing Heth's desire for revenge against the Federation and ignoring the needed changes the CPD brought to the megas. I attempted to walk the tight-rope of Patriot, but not Provist, surrounded by those vocally opposing the State's new direction.
In other words, the view from the other side isn't pretty either.
-
Agree with Dex. CAIN is (was? Been a while) pretty predominantly Patriot (with a pretty outspoken Liberal, granted ;)), and even served in STPRO a while, but claiming that the did anything but detest Heth from the word go is pretty silly.
Also, what happened with CVA and I-RED? Last I knew, I-RED was a Holder in Providence.
-
Also, what happened with CVA and I-RED? Last I knew, I-RED was a Holder in Providence.
Ask John.
-
stuff
I was going to reply in detail to your post, but I'll just back down and admit I've crossed a line again with my bitter posting.
I have a (possibly unfair) axe to grind with Patriot roleplayers. As a Liberal roleplayer, my entry into the RP scene was immediately met with both sides drawing a battle line in the sand OOC and IC for me. I was brought up to speed on all the OOC bad blood and such, and I've made some of my own, and by now I've simply been marinating in in the bitterness for too long. I'm bitter about it, and it shows in my posts.
I've already posted more than I should, so I'll take my leave now.
Oh, and... I apologize for upsetting, accusing, and blaming others in this thread. :ugh:
-
Agree with Dex. CAIN is (was? Been a while) pretty predominantly Patriot (with a pretty outspoken Liberal, granted ;)), and even served in STPRO a while, but claiming that the did anything but detest Heth from the word go is pretty silly.
Also, what happened with CVA and I-RED? Last I knew, I-RED was a Holder in Providence.
Unpaid dues by CVA which was fine until they called us liars. So we enjoy mutual KOS standings. There was a big IC thingy on IGS about it a few years back.
-
stuff
I was going to reply in detail to your post, but I'll just back down and admit I've crossed a line again with my bitter posting.
I have a (possibly unfair) axe to grind with Patriot roleplayers. As a Liberal roleplayer, my entry into the RP scene was immediately met with both sides drawing a battle line in the sand OOC and IC for me. I was brought up to speed on all the OOC bad blood and such, and I've made some of my own, and by now I've simply been marinating in in the bitterness for too long. I'm bitter about it, and it shows in my posts.
I've already posted more than I should, so I'll take my leave now.
Oh, and... I apologize for upsetting, accusing, and blaming others in this thread. :ugh:
I'm confused at this OOC bad blood between Liberals and Patriots you mention. I definitely must have missed something, because in my experience with a Patriot group employing a Liberal spokeswoman, there was definitely no bad blood there. Nor between CAIN and I-RED, thought this was pre-CVA, so again I might have missed something.
On the other hand, shooting at State assets...yeah, I can see how that might get you labeled a traitor.
-
I have no idea what you're talking about. I keep thinking I got your post, but then I'm like... no I'm still confused.
Anyways, IC is IC.
Clarification: I really didn't like the Caldari Prime storyline, amongst other things. As for my character, he doesn't think that I-RED or Stitcher have all that much of a right to talk about how they opposed Heth, when (from his perspective) they haven't done a lot for the State or the Megas in any case.
-
I don't want to backseat mod, but the "how to oppose Heth" discussion could use its own thread, if we're willing to discuss it. As for the topic, RP crowds typically are somewhat capable of creating drama. And someone will get OOC angry at some point. And that's how things go. The EVE "RP community" (using the term very freely) feels, at least for a casual player, to be somewhat mature in handling this.
I-RED shooting the titan would be probably explainable IC as Ishukone already playing on the background preparing to take hold of Caldari Prime. I do seem to remember that at least once, I-RED was remote repairing the (LCO) titan. As for the letters of marque, both my IC and OOC view is kind of pointless. (Though OOC, it is still a nice mechanic and could serve a role.) That is, as long as it is a perpetual stalemate. If there were signs that one side would have a shot at capturing and holding a while theatre, then there might be an IC reaction.
-
I have no idea what you're talking about. I keep thinking I got your post, but then I'm like... no I'm still confused.
Anyways, IC is IC.
Clarification: I really didn't like the Caldari Prime storyline, amongst other things. As for my character, he doesn't think that I-RED or Stitcher have all that much of a right to talk about how they opposed Heth, when (from his perspective) they haven't done a lot for the State or the Megas in any case.
Well I hope he also realizes that I-RED is a subsidiary of Ishukone. Thus, we answer to Ishukone first, and the CEP second. Ishukone tasked I-RED with securing it's assets in Syndicate and promoting free trade in the region and adjacent regions, so that is what we do. Ishukone has no interest in the current FW scene, so we do not have any intentions of getting involved in that [censored]. Glad I could clarify. 8)
As for the topic, personally I think it is stupid to hold OOC grudges. I hold none myself, and I don't plan on starting. This is a game, I play it to have fun and make space explosions. IC grudges and drama is always fun though, but people have a tendency to let that IC drama leak into OOC, which is always no fun and quite stupid.
-
IC grudges and drama is always fun though, but people have a tendency to let that IC drama leak into OOC, which is always no fun and quite stupid.
Not just empty quoting. It's an unfortunate tendency that in many cases has to be consciously checked, or it'll creep in and ruin the fun of everyone involved.
-
Off Topic:
Some people characterize best when they have an emotional stake in what they're doing IC.
On Topic:
I think grudges and what not are a valid and vital part of Role Playing, 'fluffy bunnies' gets old fast.
That said though, there are a number of ways you can play out being antagonistic and not all of them are "Rawr! I smash!". There are also a number of degrees to which your PC might 'resist' the spread of another's ideology.
For example, two PCs who oppose Angel Cartel philosophies, one vocally denounces the Cartels and constantly calls for crusades to root out pockets of Cartel operation. The other might 'politic' about with an interest in getting corrupt government officials with links to the Cartels exposed or fired and make sure as widely as possible that Cartel sympathisers are widely thought with a number of negative social traits firmly in mind.
-
I think there are many that can't make the distinction between OOC and IC. I've seen it happen in my RP before, as many of you know. It shouldn't happen, but it does.
-
as a whole, the rp community, like the wider EVE community, has moved away from the view that was present earlier in EVE, that actions have consequences.
CCP promote this with their "Power of 2".
Buy/sell characters, to avoid consequence.
Buy sec.status, to avoid consequence.
2nd account to avoid consequence.
This has resulted in a situation where consequences for actions are only for people on the margins of "the community". Today, shoot blood raiders, tomorrow are one, next week, be a 24th Crusader. No consequences for this are expected, and anyone acting as if those actions do have consequences gets shouted down OOC.
"These consequences aren't fun!", well, why not make them fun ? instead of expecting people not to take actions of someone into account ?
Or is this all this ~mercurial and fickle empyrean beholden to none~ thing again ?
Consequence free environment. vOv
-
Alt culture only makes it harder to pursue revenge/justice/vendettas. A lot are painfully obvious. Many, such as mine and Ava's are publicly known. Regardless of any flimsy pretence of IC/OOC divide in situations of extremis (I.E. someone has it is for someone else), the mod-enforced and mob-enforced communities in eve (corporations, the rp community, 3rd party forums etc) are well equipped to detect, and in dire situations 'out', and in worse situations cut off the alts of repeat offenders from the areas in which they misbehave.
Even if someone were to evade the many means by which this may come about, it will restrict their ability to pursue what they once did, with the same fervour that garnered them the ill-will of a group to start with.
Simply put - alts mitigate but do not circumvent the response to anti-social behaviour on the part of the alt-holder. Some may argue they might even assist in rehabilitation, as there is a culture of 'zero tolerance once over THIS line' in eve communities in general, which encourages dire offenders who may have reassessed their behaviours to change tack and maybe even improve themselves on a personal level, to embrace alts as a way to get back in for purely benign purposes. Wishful thinking maybe, but in a situation such as this where you have no choice what people do with their PLEX time/money, I find it far more constructive to consider the positives that can come out of the situation and 'judge by actions' characters on an individual basis.
Repercussions are ten and penny, but people just don't seem to want to escalate, even when doing such would be greatly to their benefit and the benefit of their like-minded peers.
-
Repercussions are ten and penny, but people just don't seem to want to escalate, even when doing such would be greatly to their benefit and the benefit of their like-minded peers.
A couple years back, someone wrote on the IGS, about having worked with the Blood Raiders, and obtained a Cruor of experimental design, iirc.
An Amarr loyalist character, declared war on them.
This led to some threads, on this forum, and on the IGS, where it was argued that the Amarr loyalist was "going too far", and the end result was that some people left the RP community entirely.
The view on this forum at that time, was largely that the Amarr person was right to declare war.
Today, people offer to assist the Blood raiders, then get upset if this fact is ever mentioned. People that actively assisted pirate factions to assault civilian populations, get upset if these facts are ever mentioned.
The OOC bile and hatred thrown out when these facts are just mentioned, is a clear indication that taking actions, such as wars, would be orders of magnitude less enjoyable, that taking action is just going to be tedious and uninteresting, so no actions are taken, because people have better things to do in a game, that they play for entertainment, such as interacting with IC enemies that embrace the consequences, and are willing to RP with those facts.
So, vOv
-
Some people will always favor gameplay fun above all, and some will prefer RP consistency every time.
Usually leads to OOC conflicts or misunderstandings.
I agree though that mentalities change.
-
I don't know, it seems to me that the RP community certainly holds a grudge.
Look at I-Red. One ridiculous moment of assisting the FDU and now they are pretty much black-balled in the Caldari Loyalist RP community. I know people who are, IC and OOC, hostile to each other over events that happened before they even started playing Eve.
Pyre Falcon deploys to Metropolis for three weeks - an IC friendship between Ava and Pieter that was months in the making is destroyed for good.
My RP always has IC consequences - which is the way I like it.
-
Repercussions are ten and penny, but people just don't seem to want to escalate, even when doing such would be greatly to their benefit and the benefit of their like-minded peers.
A couple years back, someone wrote on the IGS, about having worked with the Blood Raiders, and obtained a Cruor of experimental design, iirc.
An Amarr loyalist character, declared war on them.
This led to some threads, on this forum, and on the IGS, where it was argued that the Amarr loyalist was "going too far", and the end result was that some people left the RP community entirely.
The view on this forum at that time, was largely that the Amarr person was right to declare war.
Today, people offer to assist the Blood raiders, then get upset if this fact is ever mentioned. People that actively assisted pirate factions to assault civilian populations, get upset if these facts are ever mentioned.
The OOC bile and hatred thrown out when these facts are just mentioned, is a clear indication that taking actions, such as wars, would be orders of magnitude less enjoyable, that taking action is just going to be tedious and uninteresting, so no actions are taken, because people have better things to do in a game, that they play for entertainment, such as interacting with IC enemies that embrace the consequences, and are willing to RP with those facts.
So, vOv
That (http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1436115) was (http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1438426) awesome (http://backstage.eve-inspiracy.com/index.php?topic=1561.0).
Not the whole "I'm leaving" drama but the RP in general. I miss that for sure.
This tread details one of my pet-peeves, really. I see it all the time in EVE, it's happened so many times over the years that it's basically a standard and anything that breaks it is a deviation from the norm: Character A betrays faction Z. Character B supports faction Z but makes little noise about it. After a round in faction X, (at war with Z) character A leaves for Z again or takes a round in Y. (Also an enemy of Z.) Eventually when character A returns to the door of Z, character B will welcome A back with minor fuzz, if any. As opposed to say, telling character A to go fuck him/herself.
Merdaneth elaborated on this earlier and it's been discussed allot. One of my biggest gripes is the extreme lack of consequences for any actions in this game, and as for myself, I've made it a point to provide consequences as much as I can, when and if I can. I would personally hope that more people start doing this and react more to these kind of situations like their characters supposedly would, however A) I can't know better than the owners of other toons how those toons really will react and B) It's not my place to dictate what others should do anyway.
Still, I will hold out hope that one day the IGS and players in general will start treating betrayals, defections, chilling with the enemy and general fraternization for what it is and react accordingly. Until then...
There are also a number of posts in this tread I would like to respond to directly, but it's summer, it's hot and I've no real time. Another day, I guess. I just hope this topic is still relevant by then... :D
-
I'm rather baffled by the "omg a wardec!"
I always viewed being wardecced by another RP organization as a reward, not a punishment.
I mean, I get that I was always a bit PVP leaning, but isnt RP wars and conflicts why we RP in a game about wars and conflicts?
-
I've been rather annoyed by what seems to be a prevailing theme on the IGS of IC posts along the lines of "Oh, not this shit again" in regards to long-standing, traditional and core-PF enmities - Amarr-Minmatar and Gallente-Caldari, for instance (to choose low-hanging examples). Minmatar A makes aggressive/antagonistic comment directed toward Amarr faction in some thread, Gallente B spams the :roll: smiley and makes snarky comments about Minmatar needing to "get over it" or some such nonsense.
I've also had to shake my head over seeing examples of what's been mentioned here with PC faction betrayers/turncoats cycling through the factions, returning to their original factions (for however long before jumping back to some other group, enemy or otherwise) and somehow remaining loved by all. But then, I'm the guy who removed his corp from Star Fraction, giving up at-cost and below-cost Tech 3 cruisers and lolTitanBridge hotdrops because my character couldn't condone and/or be associated (even indirectly) with Revan Nefaris and Jade Constantine's relationship with same - despite not really giving a flying fuck about it OOC. (Granted, it's well known that I didn't like Revan's player, but as I never had to RP with her, what did I care who Jade was 'with' IC?)
I believe wholeheartedly in IC consequences for IC actions. That won't change. I, like BloodBird, hold out hope for the return to what I think of as better days for RP. Until then, I will take whatever opportunity presents itself to point out inconsistencies and conflicts in IC posts with IC posts of my (Havohej's) own. And if some people don't like it... well.
In prison, if I pissed someone off to the point they started talking trash, I'd tell them to "put blood in my mouth." In EVE, if I piss someone off, Havo will tell them what Jade used to always tell people: Wardec me.
EDIT: What it comes down to for me is that I'm in no way obligated to respect or participate in anyone's retcons. Used to be an Amarr loyalist/Sanshabot/Blood Raider/whatever? Then Havo's not likely to like/trust you if he's aware of it or becomes aware of it. But he is likely to call you out on it if he catches you pretending otherwise (and if I cba to post on the IGS or RP ingame aside from shooting at things).
-
What the big H said.
-
What the big H said.
-
What the big H said.
-
Well wouldn't it be nice ? I would love to see that more, but I still think that such cases continue to exist, fortunately. Everything has not gotten suddenly sour and my own character is the prime example of this, and she is far from being the type to make a lot of enemies, but she still managed to do it. Look at groups like PIE who can hold grudges almost indefinitely, and my char is still getting the flak from them after so many years for what was, at worst, a little annoyance. These are testimonies to that still being present in the community, and still surviving even with that echo chamber syndrome we sometimes have growing. Granted, i'm maybe not part of the latter so maybe it puts me out of the equation.
As much as this situation with PIE pisses me off OOCly for totally different reasons, I for one gladly welcome it every time I get a remember of it, because it would be no fun otherwise.
-
<snip>
But then, I'm the guy who removed his corp from Star Fraction, giving up at-cost and below-cost Tech 3 cruisers and lolTitanBridge hotdrops because my character couldn't condone and/or be associated (even indirectly) with Revan Nefaris and Jade Constantine's relationship with same - despite not really giving a flying fuck about it OOC. (Granted, it's well known that I didn't like Revan's player, but as I never had to RP with her, what did I care who Jade was 'with' IC?)
<snip>
Now I think on it.
Arnulf (the character) thinks that Havohej is vermin (mainly because of the freighter load of freed slaves he had killed) & would cheerfully biomass him if he could. However he did approve of that because he felt that an anarchist revolutionary romancing a crazed Sani Sabik elitist was hypocritical to a fairly obnoxious degree.
Please note these are IC attitudes. As a player I'm sure Jade (the character) had good reasons for going her way and I don't consider her, or her player, as doing anything wrong. I just dislike the character IC as a consequence. It also means my character is curious as to the mindset and upbringing that made her justify all of this to herself. Without any evidence to the contrary he tends to think of her as a rich brat playing at revolution to pass the time.
-
Gotta agree here - and I personally am a recipient of 'faction forgiveness', to some extent. Reppy is on record as a former Angel, a number of people know that she danced the Blood Raider tune during a period of total mental breakdown, she's a firm supporter of the Khanid Kingdom, and has gone on record numerous times stating that emancipation is a bad idea.
Yet to see one negative consequence. Still got friends everywhere. Closest thing I have to an IC enemy is DK, and Reppy's baited the crap out of her. I've just sort of shrugged and rolled with it, but it's got to the point (both IC and OOC) that Reppy's effectively stopped pretending a lot of shit just because it doesn't seem to matter to anyone. Not even as careful as I used to be about appearing friendly with Sabik. I'm not about to go burning bridges just for the hell of it, but I am - and always have been - fully prepared for someone to come gunning for me, literally or figuratively.
Speaking for myself, I do hold grudges - as they make sense IC, anyway. Lilly Terranova was mud in Reppy's mind for ages, but in the end just gave up because it no longer seemed important. Anyone who is or has been a Sansha will never be a friend of Reppy's. Other examples I won't bring up.
-
There is also something else that is directly implanted in the very PF surrounding our characters that might be potentially a huge cause of that faction forgiveness syndrome. We play independent/freelance capsuleers. Above the usual fickle facet they have, the simple fact that our characters can at best claim that they support X or Y does not make them part of X or Y. Eventually when I think of capsuleer conflicts like we have, either through war decs or other things, what is the point of all of this ? Flexing our muscles and see who is better at war or at rhetorics ? We could not exist or not having any conflicts, or at the contrary, more of them, that it would eventually not change the slightest thing for our own factions.
Still wondering if it applies to live events too or not though. Live events completely lack consequences for one's involvement in them. Eventually I can go claim I support the Feds at Colelie the first time and then the Rep the second time and claim "BUT I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND". Totally consequences free.
We are volatile, and if not OOCly, then ICly since it's more or less PF that wants that. :|
-
I have to say one of the worst experiences in my RP history was the opposite of 'faction forgiveness."
I had someone who was an IC and OOC friend invite me to return to a corporation that I had previously had been a member of and some of the corporation held me in very painful regard given my character's history. And it was fair.
It sucked. Trying hard to be a part of something and getting blamed for anything that could or did go wrong at any time. Terrible. It's enough to make me hate that organization and try and shit on anything they ever try to do for the rest of my eve career. Being strictly held accountable can suck worse than anything. And it's perfectly fair what they did. I have to say that 3 years later, all the worst things they said have come true.
Expect that anything you say or do IC will have consequences. People you want to RP with 3 years from now will remember or be reminded, and it will fuck you up. Your old friends will turn on you. New allegiances will form and be discarded faster than any mortal wind can change direction. It's eve... deal with it.
-
Long wordspew incoming.
Dealing with Esna IC can be rather wierd in this respect. On the one hand, he can very forgiving in some respects - usually if he judges the character in question to be adequately seeking forgiveness for a given act. The magnitude of what they have to do to earn his forgiveness varies by act (for instance, a character who cooperated with the Cartel a bit but did nothing of significance would be able to rather easily earn his tolerance, if not like. A Cartel character who had directly attacked him would have to go through some pretty impressive stuff for Esna to stop regarding them as an enemy).
Unfortunately, I have lately seen a number of situations similar to what Karmilla has described - where a character would join one faction from another, present a valid IC reason and history for doing so, publicly present a valid reason why they would likely be tolerated (if not entirely accepted) - only to essentially be told "nothing you say or do IC is a valid reason for you to be accepted. GTFO." This is incredibly frustrating for me as a player because - over an extended period of time - player desires can change, and when someone goes to the length to design a reasonable history, motive, and rationalization for their faction transfer and/or acceptance only to be stonewalled, it feels incredibly frustrating.
Still wondering if it applies to live events too or not though. Live events completely lack consequences for one's involvement in them. Eventually I can go claim I support the Feds at Colelie the first time and then the Rep the second time and claim "BUT I HAVE CHANGED MY MIND". Totally consequences free.
This, on the other hand, is the opposite end of things (and, IMO, one of the things that bugs me the most about live events). There is literally no negative reinforcement for doing ANYTHING in a live event (or, conversely not doing something). There is no stick to match the carrot, which is barely there to begin with anyhow. Not even a temporary punishment, such as a flagging for the NPC navy of the faction you have engaged or a temporary lockout from their stations.
-
It would be nice if there was some sort of consequence for actions taken in space, and event for bad mouthing a group on the IGS (past established limits of tolerance for that group).
In addition it would be nice if there could be some recognised benefits to supporting an NPC group besides LP store access (not that this isn't useful). And maybe a recognised mechanic for seeking forgiveness, getting it and having that acknowledged. Apart from access to standings information nothing immediately comes to mind though.
-
This is incredibly frustrating for me as a player because - over an extended period of time - player desires can change, and when someone goes to the length to design a reasonable history, motive, and rationalization for their faction transfer and/or acceptance only to be stonewalled, it feels incredibly frustrating.
This highlights one of the points I think a lot of people gloss over.
A player can easily change roles, characters, factions, whatever. But this isnt about being able to change sides as a player, its about coming up with believable reasons why people should accept a character changing sides so readily.
In a game where creating alts is easy and basically expected, I think a lot of people make the mistake of thinking a player is someone being wronged when people react negatively to a character trying to switch sides, when the player can do so quite easily. Just maybe not with the narrative baggage that her former character might have.
There is a huge, huge difference in a player saying "I want to play Amarr, and youre not letting me! (or whatever)" and a player saying "I want you to accept this specific character as a someone loyal to such and such faction despite their long history to the contrary!" I think other players are well within their rights to say "well, as a player we would be happy to accept you, just not playing that character". We arent our characters. If you really want to play such and such faction, roll up a new toon without the baggage and a background to match. SPs really are overrated past a certain point, promise.
-
This is incredibly frustrating for me as a player because - over an extended period of time - player desires can change, and when someone goes to the length to design a reasonable history, motive, and rationalization for their faction transfer and/or acceptance only to be stonewalled, it feels incredibly frustrating.
This highlights one of the points I think a lot of people gloss over.
A player can easily change roles, characters, factions, whatever. But this isnt about being able to change sides as a player, its about coming up with believable reasons why people should accept a character changing sides so readily.
In a game where creating alts is easy and basically expected, I think a lot of people make the mistake of thinking a player is someone being wronged when people react negatively to a character trying to switch sides, when the player can do so quite easily. Just maybe not with the narrative baggage that her former character might have.
There is a huge, huge difference in a player saying "I want to play Amarr, and youre not letting me! (or whatever)" and a player saying "I want you to accept this specific character as a someone loyal to such and such faction despite their long history to the contrary!" I think other players are well within their rights to say "well, as a player we would be happy to accept you, just not playing that character". We arent our characters. If you really want to play such and such faction, roll up a new toon without the baggage and a background to match. SPs really are overrated past a certain point, promise.
I like the Fed. I like them *allot*. My main toons have remained with the Fed forever, since forever, and will not be leaving for any reason.
So when I wanted to play an Amarr toon, (The Amarrian Empire is awesome too) what to do... well, that's how Jesmine was born. Been there, done that, it was great fun.
The only problem I see with this argument is that not everyone has the funds or time to roll a new toon. While it is true that it would be rather shitty of us to hold PLAYERS accountable for the actions of their toons, it's not to much to ask that people deal with the flak said toons get for their actions. And yet, on the other hand, it's not always easy to deal with one's desire to do something else when your wallet don't allow new characters or the schedule don't allow for much split playtime. I guess this is an issue that has to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
However that is what this forum is for, among other things. If you feel there is an issue with EVE RP or anything, taking it up here is likely a wise option.
-
Unfortunately, I have lately seen a number of situations similar to what Karmilla has described - where a character would join one faction from another, present a valid IC reason and history for doing so, publicly present a valid reason why they would likely be tolerated (if not entirely accepted) - only to essentially be told "nothing you say or do IC is a valid reason for you to be accepted. GTFO." This is incredibly frustrating for me as a player because - over an extended period of time - player desires can change, and when someone goes to the length to design a reasonable history, motive, and rationalization for their faction transfer and/or acceptance only to be stonewalled, it feels incredibly frustrating.
There's nothing wrong with them doing that.
What is wrong is when they think that other people should just accept their background rationalization at the drop of a hat, no questions asked. Proving one's self in a new faction should be a long, hard, difficult process, where you endure all loads of bile. It should be a process you do without complaint, because learning how to endure and bear all the shit with discipline and self-composure is part of proving yourself. And this should be done in front of players, not NPCs. Any "proving" you've done in front of NPCs is, as far as I'm concerned, a non-factor. I don't care if you claim you have a whole planet that can vouch for you. If not a single player can, then you've still got a lot of work ahead of you.
If a former Republican, Blooder, EoM, whatever, were to try to join the Empire, Samira would treat them poorly, and be suspicious of them. No matter what their excuse. Until they prove to her, in a way that she can personally witness and verify, that they've changed, she's not going to accept them no matter what they try and claim they've done. The only reason Halete has gotten any acceptance from Samira is because Halete has already been proving her commitment by fighting for PYRE. If she had gone to Samira straight out of Republic militia, Samira would not have been quite so kind. See Ayallah as an example of someone that tried that route.
If Samira were to ever turn against the Empire and support the Republic, I would expect her to be despised, by both sides. I wouldn't expect, and wouldn't want her to be accepted. Hatred and intolerance are much more fun. I love the way people like Havohej act around Samira, or when Amarr treat her like dirt just because she's Minmatar, because conflict is what makes RP interesting. Hugglefest is boring.
All that being said, this should be completely IC, not OOC. It's just a game, and if people seriously judge people based on their OOC faction choices then they're definitely an asshole. I've had that happen to me on another game and it was pretty awful. People on the opposite side aren't your real, personal enemy. They're your opponent in a video game. IC/OOC separation.
-
I'm quite convinced that 'is boring' and 'is interesting' are at the very least 2-place predicates. Which means nothing is simply boring or interesting, but it's always 'x is boring to y' or 'x is interesting to z'. Whether conflict is what makes RP interesting depends on the person in question.
Also, there's a difference between stonewalling people and making it hard for them to prove themselves. I don't think that one should be required to endure bile and shit without complaint just because one wants to change ones allegiance, especially not indefinitely and exclusively. It'd be more honest to tell the person in question that they'd better roll a new toon, if they really want to join in that case.
I've also seen people who had themselves a somewhat stained past - just one that's somewhat forgotten already - and who had been given a much more fair chance at redeeming themselves get all over people who did far less than they had. Oh sweet oblivion of forgetfulness.
If one doesn't see that literally stonewalling people is incredibly frustrating, then I don't know what to say, honestly.
-
I'm quite convinced that 'is boring' and 'is interesting' are at the very least 2-place predicates. Which means nothing is simply boring or interesting, but it's always 'x is boring to y' or 'x is interesting to z'. Whether conflict is what makes RP interesting depends on the person in question.
Except it's not. Conflict is what is needed for story. Without conflict, there is no story. No one grows, no one develops. There must be a challenge to overcome or there is no point. Ask any other writer this and they will tell you the same.
That conflict doesn't necessarily have to be this kind of conflict, but conflict is needed for there to be a story at all. Therefore one shouldn't seek to avoid it, as long as the conflict is IC.
Also, there's a difference between stonewalling people and making it hard for them to prove themselves. I don't think that one should be required to endure bile and shit without complaint just because one wants to change ones allegiance, especially not indefinitely and exclusively. It'd be more honest to tell the person in question that they'd better roll a new toon, if they really want to join in that case.
Former should be IC. Latter is OOC. Former should not be OOC, and is wrong if it is. If one wants to avoid the former, then they should choose to roll a new toon, yes. If they choose to use their old toon, then they should expect the former.
-
I'll point out that not everyone is attempting to RP a story.
-
In turn, I'll point out that RP, by its very nature, is a story. A false narrative. Try or not, a story we tell - together, each of us writing into it the role of our respective characters.
-
[...]
If a former Republican, Blooder, EoM, whatever, were to try to join the Empire, Samira would treat them poorly, and be suspicious of them. No matter what their excuse. Until they prove to her, in a way that she can personally witness and verify, that they've changed, she's not going to accept them no matter what they try and claim they've done. The only reason Halete has gotten any acceptance from Samira is because Halete has already been proving her commitment by fighting for PYRE.
[...]
I think Esna does not disagree with you that a faction switch or "redemption arc" should be easy and/or accepted on face value by everyone involved; I personally think that'd be boring, too. Just that some people seem to think it should be literally impossible, and that that's rather frustrating to deal with as a player.
-
It should definitely not be impossible, no. (unless the character fails, of course)
-
Except it's not. Conflict is what is needed for story. Without conflict, there is no story. No one grows, no one develops. There must be a challenge to overcome or there is no point. Ask any other writer this and they will tell you the same.
That conflict doesn't necessarily have to be this kind of conflict, but conflict is needed for there to be a story at all. Therefore one shouldn't seek to avoid it, as long as the conflict is IC.
That still doesn't mean conflict is what makes RP interesting and hugglefest (what does that even mean?) is boring.
It does mean you feel conflict is what makes RP interesting and hugglefest is boring.
Unless you're suggesting everyone else is just doing it wrong?
-
Except it's not. Conflict is what is needed for story. Without conflict, there is no story. No one grows, no one develops. There must be a challenge to overcome or there is no point. Ask any other writer this and they will tell you the same.
That conflict doesn't necessarily have to be this kind of conflict, but conflict is needed for there to be a story at all. Therefore one shouldn't seek to avoid it, as long as the conflict is IC.
That still doesn't mean conflict is what makes RP interesting and hugglefest (what does that even mean?) is boring.
It does mean you feel conflict is what makes RP interesting and hugglefest is boring.
Unless you're suggesting everyone else is just doing it wrong?
Pretty much this.
-
Most people seem to agree that changing sides should be a series of trials, personal investment on the behalf of a character. Something that asks for more or less effort depending on their background - an hedonist priest may face less hardship than a freedom fighter seeking redemption...
People are usually unhappy with both of the extremes, either the stonewall where the player trying to switch sides will just get disgusted, or either the giant forgiving hugglefest where the faction blocs will also get disgusted to see everyone getting away with anything.
I also agree that what makes a story a good story is conflict. That's my personal opinion on the matter and most serious writers will also say the same. However, that does not mean that stories always have conflicts or drama (cf comedy). Some people will just enjoy stories with happy things inside, without much conflict. Not my cup of tea, but I am pretty sure we could find a lot of examples of this, without even going into the comedy side.
-
In turn, I'll point out that RP, by its very nature, is a story. A false narrative. Try or not, a story we tell - together, each of us writing into it the role of our respective characters.
Then you're using a different definition of story than Samira is. A false narrative doesn't need conflict.
Which is fine, but I went with Samira's definition because I was responding to her post.
-
I think, personally, what makes a good story good is - among other things - the right amount of conflict. Change isn't always conflict, by the way. Other things than conflict contribute to growth and development than mere conflict. Too much conflict makes a story uninteresting in my opinion and lead to stagnation just as much as not enough conflict. Conflict doesn't lead to change, it's not sufficient for change, it merely contributes to character growth and development.
But, even if conflict is necessary for a good story, it might just not be what the writer/reader of the story really finds interesting about it. I don't see how it could not be a valid answer to "What do you find interesting about this story?" if one says "I don't find the conflict to be what is interesting about the story, even though it's an integral part of it, but...".
It's kind of thought-policing if one prescribes what has to be the interesting part of all and every stories.