And he's not going to complain about his decisions but the interpretation of the GM, he will complain how it was unfair because he only did what the guards should have done but now he suddenly can't play his character as a guards anymore.
If the GM made an OOC mistake, then that player has every right to be angry. What you're saying sounds like a mistake on the GM's part.
It's idealistic to ask the game for assistance outside of a scope of actions. I understand most of the things you are asking for from a human perspective but I would have no clue how it would be implemented into the game.
By assistance I just mean allowing players to be assisted by the game itself to perform roles. Instead of having a GM assist with a roleplay by playing a guard, the game would assist by providing a guard position for a player.
Personally I am a fan of GM guards because it means they have a good way to handle certain things ICly aswel as the ability to provide a character for events thats somewhat more consistent while having authority.
They could still retain that role. But I honestly think roleplaying GMs should be separate from moderating GMs. A roleplaying GM could fill the role of a higher ranking guard.
I agree they should play their guard character more often but I don't mind them not having that training period aslong as they rp they had it. I don't see anyone roleplaying them being a baby to them being child to them being a adult and I wouldn't be interested in that. We all, they too have some place they come from and as long as they roleplay according to that then that's enough for me.
I'm not suggesting they roleplay something as absurd as growing up. Just be part of the world. The guards roleplayed by GMs are just that and only that. They barely have humanity. They're extremely powerful. You couldn't catch one off-duty and have an ordinary conversation. You couldn't kidnap a guard's family member for a plot. You probably couldn't even bribe a GM guard, despite that being a notable problem within Hydlaa's guard. The game as it is severely limits the potential that this would have if players were guards, or even just GMs who specifically roleplayed.
A note, there will never(well, not in a relevant timespan) be a game where you can do whatever you want. If you want to achieve that that would require an almost completely laisez faire world where you can do whatever and aren't bound by lore and have the ability to create buildings, with no real skill systems, etc...
I think you're misunderstanding me. I don't want that, and I doubt anyone reasonable or who understands game design does.
I'm asking for what PlaneShift promised.
http://www.planeshift.it/About It's a roleplaying game, but in its current state you're severely limited in what you can roleplay within the mechanics and rules. And I'm getting the feeling it's going to continue to be this way forever.
It's like the development team is too afraid to give players the freedom to play roles they should be able to have in the roleplaying game which was described by the developers themselves.
I agree it would be good if characters would fill roles(And I still think shops are a good start possible with a tax collecter aswel), I don't think they should have to ability to enforce them however, I think that should be left outside of the hands of players and their characters.
The shops with taxes is probably a good idea. I really like the concept of the Hydlaa Market and the player-owned makeshift shops which currently exist. Expanding it to become a more permanent part of the game, potentially creating a player-driven economy, would be something that players would appreciate, I think.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "enforced", though. Unless you're talking about the taxes. Honestly, if taxes exist, they should be equal for all players participating. Either they're enforced or not at all. That should probably be done by a GM or the game mechanics.
edit: I could actually see a player becoming a tax collector potentially being pretty interesting. If it turned out that the character was stealing money, they'd essentially be stealing from the government, and that could make for some fun roleplay. A GM might have to be involved, though, to send that player out to collect money from each shop-owner/property-owner and then to count the money.
We really shouldn't start with government positions or rebellions(especially not rebellions), beyond perhaps something like tax collecting (if a tax is instituted), something like verification certain laws are adhered to (but do not enforce them) or a census. That last one is something which can already be done and has some benefit to people, for example make a list of professions and who performs them or something like that.
You make good points here that I agree with. For the record, there is a property tax. If a shopkeeper owns a permanent space, there's supposed to be tax on it. According to the laws, anyway.
I would urge players to just go ahead and try to fill these roles that I'm suggesting. It's been tried in the past, but players were always struck down with "It's not part of the mechanics!" or "It's against the rules to impersonate a GM!" (when all you're doing is roleplaying a guard or official). I used to be against players filling these roles, but now that I've had time to think about it and have learned quite a bit about game design I can see that it's not a good opinion. If you have that opinion because "It's the rules" or "It's the mechanics", you're relying on an appeal to authority. Right now, the authority isn't doing the best thing for this game. It's pretty much killing the game.
