Print

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

[Saede Riordan]

People frown upon non consensual RP most of the time, except by a few like Mr Smuggles above, and I think that is where the difference in appreciation comes from since I do not consider the slightest metagaming to be part of the OOC game rules at all. It may be encouraged by CCP or not, that's not the point, it's not part of the game rules and mechanisms, it's just what players do between themselves, the same way people can choose to behave in a certain way between themselves out of the RP contracts in an emote contest or whatever.

Unless I get a "theft mail" from a corp heist - which would imply actual theft mechanisms behind - I will never consider a corp heist/breach of security part of game mechanisms (versus part of the game/metagame, which is totally different).

I think there is a huge difference between godmodding and non-consensual RP. First off, anything you do out of pod with /me's is by its nature entirely consensual. I can /me the gun and blewed up in Pieter's faec, all day long, and he can ignore me and continue as if my character isn't present. The only ways that text RP can be non-consensual is through the IC sharing of information, against the wishes of the other party. However, there are plenty of other ways to create non-consensual RP. If I find your spaceship, web, scram, and ECM it, and proceed to talk freespace ideology at you in local, that's pretty damn non-consensual. When I RP at non-RPers in local, that's non-consensual RP too. If I wardec a corp for RP reasons, or execute a theft for RP reasons, or take any action allowed by the game mechanics for any RP reasons that the other player doesn't want, its non-consensual RP. So in a sense, godmodding is recognizable in its futility. The other player can ignore it. I can't drop my character into 'god mode' in a chat channel and force someone to accept my /me's. But if I decloak on them in a Pilgrim, that's real. That's a concrete action. Until we have some mechanical way to translate those /me's into dice rolls though, chat RP will always be mostly consensual.

As for corp thefts not being part of the game's mechanisms I entirely disagree. I disagree because its very blatantly not against the game rules, when, in a lot of MMOs, stealing from the guild, or scamming in a trade centre, is likely to earn you a fairly rapid ban. The fact that this won't happen in EVE is in itself a form of the games mechanics. Petitions, GMs, and banning are part of the game mechanics at the end of the day; they're part of what defines the game universe and the rules within it. 

When I run a corp I reserve the right to defend the corp from threats that I know about only due to OOC information. I'll respect that divide as long as I can, but the second it moves from "Oh, so and so is a secret heretic" to "so and so plans to start awoxing or corp thieving" then my character heard that the person was dangerous from a little bird. Its an IC action to kick, still. If it has an effect on the game world its IC, but the *Reasons* for the IC kick are going to require a little imagination since the evidence for the kick is OOC.

In a game like this ignoring OOC warning signs that you have a saboteur in corp is just silly.

This basically.

[Galen Darksmith]

I think there is a huge difference between godmodding and non-consensual RP. First off, anything you do out of pod with /me's is by its nature entirely consensual. I can /me the gun and blewed up in Pieter's faec, all day long, and he can ignore me and continue as if my character isn't present. The only ways that text RP can be non-consensual is through the IC sharing of information, against the wishes of the other party. However, there are plenty of other ways to create non-consensual RP. If I find your spaceship, web, scram, and ECM it, and proceed to talk freespace ideology at you in local, that's pretty damn non-consensual. When I RP at non-RPers in local, that's non-consensual RP too. If I wardec a corp for RP reasons, or execute a theft for RP reasons, or take any action allowed by the game mechanics for any RP reasons that the other player doesn't want, its non-consensual RP. So in a sense, godmodding is recognizable in its futility. The other player can ignore it. I can't drop my character into 'god mode' in a chat channel and force someone to accept my /me's. But if I decloak on them in a Pilgrim, that's real. That's a concrete action. Until we have some mechanical way to translate those /me's into dice rolls though, chat RP will always be mostly consensual.

I think it's mostly a matter of semantics.  When I first started playing EVE, I was horrified whne someone mentioned non-consensual RP on the old Chatsubo.  Pretty sure I compared it to harassment.  As I've played though, I realized that between the game's approach to PvP and our tendency as a community to view ALL ingame actions as IC it was inevitable that something was going to happen to your character in space that you didn't want to happen, and it was IC.  Thus, non-consensual RP.  Like Saede said, anything happening in text pretty much has to be a co-operative effort by default.

On the topic itself....meh.  Shit happens, and we all know this game is full of shit   To vandalize a Winston Churchill quote, "EVE is the worst MMO there is, except for all the other ones."

[Lyn Farel]

Ah yes, right, the sacro saint difference of "I stole your shit ingame and so, it's IC, no matter what is involved behind. I can agree behind the premise, but I can barely ignore that it remains a so called IC action out of metagaming.

I reiterate: metagaming =/= ingame mechanisms. The result is IC as you can't really handwave it of course, but using corp infiltration, or more generally metagaming since it does not limit itself to corp heists, but also to every kind of betrayal coming out of OOC metagame (including a few kinds of pvp in space), it is very, very bad form imo.

And kind of similar of godmodding: I would argue that you do not have a set framework to work on, except on the IC results after the act.

[Havohej]

That's sort of the whole thing with Eve, though - the metagame.  The entire thing is very metagame-y and social engineering is a very large part of that.

I've always agreed with SirMolle's famously attributed assertion that everyone who plays Eve is roleplaying in some way.  OOC relationships made with ill-intent to begin with seem to me to fall right into that line of thought.  Non-consensual RP, if you will - RPing with/at you while you are entirely out-of-character.  I'm sure that concept holds very little water for people who've dealth with an OOC betrayal, particularly one with lasting IC consequences so that the OOC betrayal hangs over and taints their continued enjoyment of the game for however long it takes to get over it, but it comes back to what Che Biko and others have said: if you want your character to pull off a heist or some other back-stabby act in Eve, it's unavoidable that you're going to leave someone feeling betrayed OOCly because of the nature of Eve and online gaming in general (Voice comms, ooc chat channels, forums, etc. where OOC bonds between actual people are formed - all very metagame-y in themselves).

[Saede Riordan]

That's sort of the whole thing with Eve, though - the metagame.  The entire thing is very metagame-y and social engineering is a very large part of that.

I've always agreed with SirMolle's famously attributed assertion that everyone who plays Eve is roleplaying in some way.  OOC relationships made with ill-intent to begin with seem to me to fall right into that line of thought.  Non-consensual RP, if you will - RPing with/at you while you are entirely out-of-character.  I'm sure that concept holds very little water for people who've dealth with an OOC betrayal, particularly one with lasting IC consequences so that the OOC betrayal hangs over and taints their continued enjoyment of the game for however long it takes to get over it, but it comes back to what Che Biko and others have said: if you want your character to pull off a heist or some other back-stabby act in Eve, it's unavoidable that you're going to leave someone feeling betrayed OOCly because of the nature of Eve and online gaming in general (Voice comms, ooc chat channels, forums, etc. where OOC bonds between actual people are formed - all very metagame-y in themselves).

All of this really. I play EVE for the metagame. Its what keeps me coming back more then RP even does. Reading about the thefts of thousands of dollars IRL worth of assets is what initially got me interested. So poor form? I'd dispute that. I'd say its the perfect form for EVE.

[Lyn Farel]

Oh for Eve, sure. Nobody denies that.

[Pieter Tuulinen]

All of this really. I play EVE for the metagame. Its what keeps me coming back more then RP even does. Reading about the thefts of thousands of dollars IRL worth of assets is what initially got me interested. So poor form? I'd dispute that. I'd say its the perfect form for EVE.

Part of the act of a Corp Theft is in deciding when the benefit of pulling the chain outweighs the consequences, of course.

One of those consequences IS the OOC relationship - unless you manage to obsfucate your OOC identity, of course. This can be difficult in a community as small as the RP community.

As much as I enjoy reading tales of epic Alliance/Coalition level schemes, I wouldn't want to share a corporation with one of the prime movers!

[Arista Shahni]

Another major issue with this whole thing..

If the player doing the "real" theft forewarned the victim OOC.. acting against is "metagaming".

People may notice I don't say much or show much OOC about my character IC that isn't obvious or easily knowable.  This is because this is how I learned to RP in MMOs - I shoot from the hip and etc.  There are records, yes, but they are all wholly in my hands and under my control and not sitting anywhere someone can find them.  If people want to dig into my char's life they need to do so with me 'GM'ing it in a sense.  If I am going to stab someone in the back or kiss them on the mouth they will not see it coming based on any info put up as 'you cant know this IC but I'm putting it up to show it', because it forces people to make decisions literally based on 'meta" information about me -- things they know OOC that could effect IC actions. 

Best example LARPErs will get.  Your LARP char cant see ghosts but they can hurt you.  You see a ghost on the path (white headbanded or whatever system you use.) ... what are  you going to do...?  suiddenyl remember you have to pee... or walk right into a trap you can see with your OOC eyes?

Some of that info, people NEED to act on in EVE.  A corp theft would def. be one of those things.  There  are plenty of pure RP ones as well.  I'm sure not everyone here will handwave anything bad happening to them because :grimdark: for one, and for two if you just keep ignoring RP 'bad conseqequences' you don't like that aren't godmodding you're a bad RPer and should feel bad.   (ex.  Arista said something to my char that sparked this horrible memory or made other people hate me.. you know what im going to pretend she didnt say that and make everyone else who witnessed it handwave it as well cause its 'nonconsensual'.  Doesn't work.  Ok I know using Arista as an example is bad as shes a frickin mushy carebear but still you get the point I hope. )

It boils down, honestly, to what weighs more.  The RP /me aspect , or the ISK value, or if both are equal (which for most people,. this is likely the deal).. likely the reason a lot of us are shuffling our feet, at least a little, on the IC/OOC divide.  Because in all respects, there IS a divide. 

Trick me into 'consensually' drinking something IC thats poisoned or drugged and I'm drugged and that could lead to IC consequences that could effect my character for months. (this is like forum RP.. where phrasing and etc can make something that would seem 'nonconsensual" consensual because you just weren't paying enough attention, or couldn't think of a counter, or didn't have one in place, etc.) Blow up my ship and I lose isk that could also effect me for months.  It's just a matter of how I value the effect of one versus the other.  If I play primarily for RP, then the RP effect will "hurt me oocly" more.  If I play primarily for game mechanics, then game mechanics will "hurt me more oocly".  etc.

At the end of the day .. RP can screw you in EVE, players can screw you in EVE, cause EVE has that 'screw you' element.   Whether it was "all OOC" or a mix is irrelevant.  Someone got screwed.  But that's EVE ... :/

[Steffanie Saissore]

At the end of the day .. RP can screw you in EVE, players can screw you in EVE, cause EVE has that 'screw you' element.   Whether it was "all OOC" or a mix is irrelevant.  Someone got screwed.  But that's EVE ... :/

I wonder if the 'screw you' element of EVE is because there are no 'laws' within the game world.  Having played EVE for only a couple of months now, the only apparent consequence for breaking laws (or what are commonly held to be laws in RL society) is turning off safety and firing on another ship in High-Sec space.  There is no recourse for acts of theft other than to try and strike back at the thief and that might just lead to more wasted time and frustration on the part of the person who was wronged (stolen from).

I find EVE interesting and have been enjoying it, but one of the issues I have been seeing is on the immersion side of the game universe: you have these nations that supposedly have rule of law and yet the game is very law-less. The only real laws are what other players are willing or not willing to do to other players and given the fact that we are faceless individuals on the net hiding behind aliases, we are (for the most part) more willing to do things to each other than if we were sitting down face-to-face in the real world.  Yes, there are consequences to our actions IC/OCC in EVE, but for some people not being able to interact with some people doesn't mean that much to them; me, I kind of like having friends and good relationships so I'm not going to abuse/betray another player's trust.

Many arguments have been made for one side or the other...I think if there means to address things like theft that didn't have to boil down to pvp and there was a better way to clearly divide IC and OOC, things like corp theft might be less 'harmful' to OOC relations.

[Shintoko Akahoshi]

Ultimately I don't believe that the rest of the cluster operates as lawlessly as we capsuleers do. I think that independent capsuleers operate in a legal area roughly comparable to minor governments, and that this was very intentionally set up by CONCORD and the major political players. There is a concern about the level of devastation that capsuleers can bring to a conflict, which seems to be the motivation behind the CONCORD laws regulating capsuleer violence. Other than that, though, the mechanisms that CONCORD provides for us to resolve disputes really are more in line with those that are available to governments rather than citizens.

[Saede Riordan]

Ultimately I don't believe that the rest of the cluster operates as lawlessly as we capsuleers do. I think that independent capsuleers operate in a legal area roughly comparable to minor governments, and that this was very intentionally set up by CONCORD and the major political players. There is a concern about the level of devastation that capsuleers can bring to a conflict, which seems to be the motivation behind the CONCORD laws regulating capsuleer violence. Other than that, though, the mechanisms that CONCORD provides for us to resolve disputes really are more in line with those that are available to governments rather than citizens.

We're kilometre long posthuman living starships, is that really that much of a surprise Shin?

[Shintoko Akahoshi]

Not in the least. I'd be more surprised if the various governments attempted to regulate us with the same laws that they apply to their own citizens.

[Ollie]

This thread seems to have taught me that I've been doinitwrong with the spy/corp thief metagame these past two or so years.

I don't use alts for that part of the game, not because I think that's the wrong way of doing it or it's OOC or whatever. It's just I don't have the time, funds or inclination to sit on a second account, roleplaying not only as the alt but as a completely different player - ie, coming up with a character and a player backstory neither of which is my own. More power to the people who can do that effectively as it's a skill, but I just don't have the energy for it.

Also, I like my small network of handpicked infiltrators and corp thieves. Sure, there's an ongoing ISK cost and some risk involved (I've probably been screwed over more times by my own spies than anyone else's) and there's a lot of time spent sorting chaff (which is most of what I get) from wheat but for me it's more immersive. I like lurking in the recruitment channel, waiting for someone with potential to come along and then trying to manipulate them into becoming a first-class infiltrator. I'm still not much good at it, still have a truly abysmal rate for newbie->superspai conversions and my network's size/reach is laughable but I suppose it's fun for me in a similar way to how losing ~500 billion ISK in supercaps is fun for a few in PL while rage-inducing for most others. 

To address the original point, are the motives behind spying/corp-theft OOC? Nothing's as absolute as that question implies. I don't care to speculate too much on what other people's motives are when I can see and talk with them face-to-face let alone in a fictional setting where the only 'contact' I have is through text. One thing RPing online from the mid-90s onwards taught me though is that almost any IC justification can be created for what appears - to some - to be an OOC action and in all but the most obvious cases trying to figure out where the line sits between IC and OOC is headache-inducing and ultimately futile in most cases.

Is the action itself OOC or 'meta'? Probably, at least partially. But 'meta' is not necessarily the same as breaching the rules, not in EVE anyway. The 'IC/OOC crossover rule' is the problem here - it's an unofficial guideline that we, the RP community, have sought to layer over the actual ruleset of the game with the expectation that others within the community will respect it as a priority. That's where any tension in these situations arises from. The game itself - both through mechanics, third-party apps/tools and dev complicity - allow for the metagame to take place and even encourage it. It makes no allowance for and does not officially support the desires of any community group within the game to over-ride that. We know this coming into the game just as we know that losing your ship and being scammed is a possibility.

And, as I just noticed, Arista said all of that better.

Edited: Too many smileys, not enough cowbell

[Havohej]

 

[Silver Night]

[mod]Flamebait removed. Please keep it constructive, folks. [/mod]