Print

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

[Julianus Soter]

I think I'm just taking reasonable precautions to prevent misunderstanding regarding my personal and in-character views and our corporation's current status of operations.

[Seriphyn]

You have expressed your OOC disagreement with the authenticity of these characters, no? So how does one make the distinction that IC actions (which also disagree with the authenticity of these characters) are not a conveyance of OOC opinions?

[Julianus Soter]

The characters are being disingenuous, in character. My character is calling them out for it in character.

[Saede Riordan]

The characters are being disingenuous, in character. My character is calling them out for it in character.

So, question Soter, if it directly effects you in a positive way to claim that my character isn't affiliated with the Angel Cartel, would you denounce that association as well?

[Julianus Soter]

Your character chooses to be affiliated with the Angel cartel, and follows that faction's philosophy of operation. Therefore, your character's claims are, as far as Soter can tell, are legitimate.

[Casiella]

So is the issue for these other characters that you don't feel that they follow the Federation philosophy?

[Julianus Soter]

The issue is they don't choose to be affiliated with a faction. They claim to be legitimate elements of a faction. Indeed, they are capsuleer CEO's of 'political parties', whose organizations are apparently registered as Capsuleer Corporations under the Yulai Conventions.

Not only does it break immersion, it strains in-character suspension of disbelief.

[Casiella]

What does faction affiliation mean for you, then? Is it a question of standings, or militia, or something else?

[Seriphyn]

Not only does it break immersion, it strains in-character suspension of disbelief.

Nobody else seems to think this, everybody's RPing away. So why does it matter?

[Julianus Soter]

Affiliation is just that, affiliation.

a : to bring or receive into close connection as a member or branch b : to associate as a member <affiliates herself with the local club>

In game mechanic terms, that means you don't hurt the thing you're affiliating with, you hold similar values, causes, and suchlike.

Having killed vast hordes of a group and then attempting to 'affiliate' with someone is problematic, roleplaying-wise.

Now the "Gallente Politicians" in question here could have chosen to be affiliates, concerned capsuleers speaking out on behalf of their beloved parties. Instead they claim to be official representatives, mouthpieces of government officials. In-character, this is very problematic, and Soter sees them as fraudulent wannabees that are threatening the stability of Federation politics and the hope for collaboration of disparate factions in Federation space.

Regarding Seriphyn's response above, my character and I have never stopped roleplaying this thread. Some merely attempt to construe my attempts at roleplay as invalid.

[Ken]

What does faction affiliation mean for you, then? Is it a question of standings, or militia, or something else?

It means these characters don't have green borders so they don't speak with the canon voice of CCP although they put forward identities that simulate (effectively, imo) such associations. 

They present a dilemma with two choices for the player.  One is to play along.  The other is to not.  Jules' player chooses to not, but to do so in a way that knocks very heavily on the fourth wall for everyone watching and voluntarily participating on the terms set by these characters.  I believe he justifies his stance, which fulfills a need to voice his objection to the concept as a player, by employing reactions that are thinly veiled by an IC veneer.

Not only does it break immersion, it strains in-character suspension of disbelief.

In fact, I would argue that the 'wardec' line of thought is intended to break immersion for those who are participating, rather than these characters themselves being the immersion-breaking element.  It is less an in-character response and more of an in-game response, that is an action that has storyline merit but which is so heavily anchored in a gameplay mechanic that it's impossible for me to believe in this context.  But then, I have accepted the terms of play these characters offer.  For Jules, who doesn't, the wardec is perfectly valid.

Nevertheless, the politicians have reacted to him on his terms and in good humor, it seems.

Soter sees them as fraudulent wannabees that are threatening the stability of Federation politics and the hope for collaboration of disparate factions in Federation space.

Jules (I mean you as the player), you see them this way too, and that's perfectly within your rights.  I don't fault your opinion.  But virtually everyone else has run with it.  By continuing the illegitimacy argument, your character appears to be somewhat nuts imo.  Cas did point out the conspiracy theorist storyline, however...  ^_^

[Casiella]

I have to say that, were I to engage in Fed RP, my character would likely react to Soter much the same as I (the player) react to people who claim that President Obama was born in Kenya.

[Julianus Soter]

Ken, i would say, indeed, it would be bringing a bit of reality into the discussion. What's breaking immersion if it brings people's attention back to facts and evidence?

[Arvo Katsuya]

My prediction came true!

By continuing the illegitimacy argument, your character appears to be somewhat nuts imo.  Cas did point out the conspiracy theorist storyline, however...  ^_^

[ 2010.06.22 23:16:48 ] Arvo Katsuya > You know, by the end of this event, Soter is going to turn into those stark raving mad conspiracy theorists with any resembling an office supply is out to get him.

[Julianus Soter]

New meme of the day! Talking with capsuleers claiming to be party chairpersons is smart politics. People shedding truth on frauds are insane.