Are realism and freedom good enough reasons to allow conflict in Yliakum's society among its citizens?
In any country, city or town you will find some sort of conflict with its people, no matter if it is religion, politics, agriculture or education people will have opposing views of one another. Conflict is in our nature.
For many years, Laanx observed in a subdued way what the Xacha were doing. Some of them, circumvented extinction and went back to their ancient traditions, while the others spontaneously created a clergy and faith based on the Book of Names. The head of this second group was a handsome young man named Galeran Tarbius, endowed with endless charisma and with an overwhelming will power. Laanx was immediately interested in him and one day he appeared to him. When Laanx left Galeran, his eyes sparkled with mystic fury, and his body glittered of the chaotic power of raw magic.
Galeran had the power to transmit his fanaticism to the most possessed of his followers. In their opinion, Laanx was the god that had given new life to their race and therefore had the right to claim their lives whenever it was necessary. Galeran led the Xacha to Yliakum and there, they settled on the first level and began immediately to use their ancient knowledge to built an iron temple consecrated to Laanx.
Yliakum cannot exist in perfect harmony, because this would mean that all beings are without desire.
Wait... is anyone actually arguing against player-based conflict?
It's because when there are 10 people who decide to harrass one new guy, he is screwed if he doesn't know what the heck and is weak. Just like in real sometimes, ;) but you all know that PS isn't free for all game, what has its good and bad sides. What is utopia there is to have good sides but not bad ;PWait... is anyone actually arguing against player-based conflict?
Apparently so, I personally cant understand it.
Well I haven't played much, but I believe duels should be allowed between player and player anywhere in the game. This would allow PvP conflicts RPly everywhere and not just limited to an arena. To further this, a DM (Deathmatch) option could be available to the players if they both agree. Now in the future, guards can be set to stop the fight and even jail the assaulter. This would be a very interesting feature indeed as well as a fun one :). I've said it before and i'll say it again, this game reminds me of another that I shall leave unnamed to stop advertisement, however i'm sure quite a few people around here know of the game I speak about since its vast land and customizeability is really only rivaled by PS. :) It should be looked upon as a base of what can and maybe should be done.Dueling is a very small minded definition of Player vs Player conflict. People have have a conflict or rivalry without ever dueling. A lot of good characters never get in a duel during their entire existence.
Player VS Player conflicts are needed to allow greater RP, however it should be understood that these conflicts should not be taken to Out Of Character states.
Yliakum is a fictional world. You need to find a better argument.Planeshift as a "Utopia": Why not? (http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=27858.0) Because it doesn't exist by definition.
steven are you talking about runescape? If PS EVER comes close to that Im quitting.An odd comment to come from you, given what I've seen you do in game...
Player vs player conflicts are what makes PS interesting imo, it would be pretty dull if everyone got along 100% of the time. Don't you think?The most fun I've had in Planeshift has come from people getting along and working together.
@Nikodemus: You touched on something there. IC conflict can create OOC conflicts. People can hide OOC conflicts with IC behaviour by acting on OOC conflicts in game and then calling it IC. This is one argument against IC conflicts.
Quote@Nikodemus: You touched on something there. IC conflict can create OOC conflicts. People can hide OOC conflicts with IC behaviour by acting on OOC conflicts in game and then calling it IC. This is one argument against IC conflicts.
I have had that happen to me but most of the time the player can differ IC with OOC, but I do get your point and it can be very annoying when someone suddenly goes OOC on you for simply trying to RP.
Fictional doesn't mean imposible. Utopian is ;) You are misunderstanding terms ;PYliakum is a fictional world. You need to find a better argument.Planeshift as a "Utopia": Why not? (http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=27858.0) Because it doesn't exist by definition.
Fictional doesn't mean imposible.
lordraleigh has no inner child
Yliakum is a fictional world. You need to find a better argument.Planeshift as a "Utopia": Why not? (http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=27858.0) Because it doesn't exist by definition.
The point is, you can play hide and seek with some kids in the park in real life
(and then later play the "avoid the pedophilia charges" game)
BTW. Is anyone seriously suggesting that doing hide and seek isnt OOC? Does it seem plausible to you guys that these adult beings in Yliakum spend their time playing hide and seek?? You complain about people dueling in front of harnquist Zanzibar, but you seem to say that hide and seek is ok?
From reading numerous posts here, it seems some people have a hard time distinguishing between a game and a real life. I always have these simple "rules" when playing any game that involves conflict and wars, including PvP:
- War/conflict in real life = bad because if you're dead, you can't go home and eat supper
- War/conflict in game = good because if you're dead, you can still go home and eat supper
Except in this game, if you die, you go to the land of the dead, and don't get to play in the land of the living any longer, until you complete some type of task to be allowed to come back. Or at least that is how it will be, when the DR is expanded and all the bugs and what not that cuase you to die when you shouldn't die have been fixed. Then death will have a meaning.
Then I cant run right back and kill someone.
That's nice and all, but it's run by, and inhabited by normal people, not ylians and enkidukais. As long as we're here, player vs. player conflicts are inevitable. Seems like a pointless discussion.Any discussion that makes people think is worthwhile.
BTW. Is anyone seriously suggesting that doing hide and seek isnt OOC? Does it seem plausible to you guys that these adult beings in Yliakum spend their time playing hide and seek?? You complain about people dueling in front of harnquist Zanzibar, but you seem to say that hide and seek is ok?Playing hide and seek with your friends versus killing eachother at the drop of a hat.... hmm. Let me think about that.:)
In the words of a dear friend "There is no wrong Roleplay".I'm only quoting this sentence, but I did read the whole post. I think there is such a thing as wrong roleplay or bad roleplaying. With roleplaying, you're supposed to be a certain character within a certain setting. If you break out of that formula, then I think your roleplaying won't be as good.
'Good' question.
The question is this: Are realism and freedom good enough reasons to allow conflict in .... society among its citizens?
'Good' question.
I'm sure Marx, Lenin, and Stalin all asked the same of their advisors....
Their answer was the KGB.
"It is good that the tree of liberty be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time"
~T.Jefferson
'Good' question.
I'm sure Marx, Lenin, and Stalin all asked the same of their advisors....
Their answer was the KGB.
"It is good that the tree of liberty be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time"
~T.Jefferson
Marx didn't have advisors - he wrote essays on the philosophy of economics and he spent most of his time in museums. He never held a position of political office. Stalin was one of Lenin's advisors, and Stalin wasn't one for asking questions or paying attention to good advice.
All three of them said that conflict was a NECESSARY force for moving society forward.
'Good' question.
The question is this: Are realism and freedom good enough reasons to allow conflict in .... society among its citizens?
I'm sure Marx, Lenin, and Stalin all asked the same of their advisors....
Their answer was the KGB.
"It is good that the tree of liberty be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants from time to time"
~T.Jefferson
What's more in a world 'based' on the Dark ages where murder and rape were as common as disease and famine, it is utterly ridiculous to even suggest a utopian society. Here, many centuries later there are still no utopian societies.
Why should Yailkum be any different? Answer: It shouldn't.
Virtually everyone who's ever lived has had 'advisors', be it their parents, friends, teachers, or co-workers. Of course Marx had advisors.
Stalin listened to advice often...he was just prone to ignoring it.
Of course that is utterly irrelevant to the point i was making, which is that the only way to 'enforce a utopia' is through violent and oppressive totalitarian rule.
What's more in a world 'based' on the Dark ages where murder and rape were as common as disease and famine, it is utterly ridiculous to even suggest a utopian society. Here, many centuries later there are still no utopian societies.
Why should Yailkum be any different? Answer: It shouldn't.
And "utopias" of are done by "cleansing" the world of some kind of "evil". The assumption of such being "evil" based on prejudice.
All three of those people fully embraced conflict and violence as a force for progress. And no, Marx didn't say that violence should be used as a way to enforce utopia - all he said was that capitalism would ultimately be overthrown by violent uprisings. All this is irrelevant though. I'm not suggesting that violence be used to enforce the rules - not in this thread, anyway.
only quoting this sentence, but I did read the whole post. I think there is such a thing as wrong roleplay or bad roleplaying. With roleplaying, you're supposed to be a certain character within a certain setting. If you break out of that formula, then I think your roleplaying won't be as good.
Are you seriously suggesting that players start RPing rapes?
You guys aren't talking about true utopias. You're only talking about failed attempts at utopias.
You guys aren't talking about true utopias. You're only talking about failed attempts at utopias.
Even to make a real Utopia it would be necessary to make the slaughter of all those who are "evil" and thus dangerous to the Utopia.
Even to make a real Utopia it would be necessary to make the slaughter of all those who are "evil" and thus dangerous to the Utopia.
Assumption.
All such attempts must ultimately fail, as "forced equality" is just another word for universal oppression.This too is an assumption - and also a narrow definition of utopia.
That is the one lesson marxists- and apparently you Zanzibar- truely cannot grasp.You're operating off of a false understanding of Marxism. Marxism says that capitalism will result in violent uprisings, such as those recently seen in France for instance.
In reality a good chunk of the citizens of Yialkum would openly revolt to prevent you from doing just that, and if crushed, a black market and underground resistance would form regardless as people who believed in freedom in society and the market worked at all times to undermine the totalitarian authority.The "Free Market" economic model is actually extremely anti-equality and anti-freedom, but that's a different discussion.
PS: i added many comments to my last post to avoid the "double post" scourge that seems to so annoy the denizens of this forum. ;)
People are greedy. They want more and more, they are evil. So a utopia would have to be full of the completely good. Even then they are at risk when tempted with their deepest desires. :'(Is human nature universal, absolute, and unchanging? No.
Even to make a real Utopia it would be necessary to make the slaughter of all those who are "evil" and thus dangerous to the Utopia.
Assumption.
There has never been a historical utopia, except perhaps a rare number of isolated aboriginal societies. And even then it's questionable. So since there has never been a historical utopia, history cannot support his position even slightly.The very absence of such societies is why history absolutely supports our position.
The very absence of such societies is why history absolutely supports our position.No, your position is a claim about the nature of utopia. But the socities you're describing are not utopias - they're merely failed attempts at utopia. So you can say that there has never been a utopia on record, but it's quite a different matter to prove that utopia is impossible to achieve. Given the nature of proof, I'd venture to say that it's impossible to prove such a claim.
Well as Jean-Paul Sartre noted "Hell is other people" and that there is why utopias are a pipe dream.
Well, zanzibar we all change but truthfully a part of our old selves is still there.This statement requires an assumption about "our old selves".
Well as Jean-Paul Sartre noted "Hell is other people" and that there is why utopias are a pipe dream.
Again, I'm not so certain that human nature is universal, unchanging, absolute, etc.
Well as Jean-Paul Sartre noted "Hell is other people" and that there is why utopias are a pipe dream.
Again, I'm not so certain that human nature is universal, unchanging, absolute, etc.
I do not understand where any of those concepts were present in my quotation, but thank you for illustrating my point.
Are you seriously suggesting that players start RPing rapes?
You guys aren't talking about true utopias. You're only talking about failed attempts at utopias.
In a TRUE utopia.. would there even be a need for Tria?
In a TRUE utopia.. would there even be a need for Tria?
True. Dollars work just fine.
Actualy that's not true. Money, in its form causes greed and corruption. Removing the thing that causes it the most would actually help relieve that problem. Not only that, but you'd have to remove trade as well by giving everyone everything equally. That would be a piece of a true Utopia. :)
The bigger problem is that the people who control the printing of money get to create wealth for themselves out of nothing.
The bigger problem is that the people who control the printing of money get to create wealth for themselves out of nothing.
That is so not how money works. In order for the money you print to actually be worth something, you have to back it up financially. Otherwise it's just paper.
That is so not how money works. In order for the money you print to actually be worth something, you have to back it up financially. Otherwise it's just paper.
That is so not how money works. In order for the money you print to actually be worth something, you have to back it up financially. Otherwise it's just paper.
LOL do you know how many fiat currencies are in use today ?
Another helpfull bit of info is that banks only need 10% of (so called) secure money that they issue. This means they have 10 dollars in assets to issue 100 dollars to the public. In the business world, this is called fraud.
Wait until a new great depression, see what happens.
If you take a look at the "money makers" as Zanzi said, you will get a clear understanding on how depressions are created.
You're the guy who gave me a link to the videos in the first place, right?
You're the guy who gave me a link to the videos in the first place, right?
No I cant take credit for that. The actual name is 'Money Masters' sory my mistake.
If any are interested, the Money Masters gives a complete history of the major players in the banking world. Be prepared it is not a short documentory, with all the material that was needed to give the complete picture it is almost 6 hours. In my opinion it is the clearest and most informative documentory in its class, well worth the time it takes to watch.
Part 1 (http://video.google.ca/url?docid=-8753934454816686947&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=money+masters&vidurl=http://video.google.ca/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-8753934454816686947%26q%3Dmoney%2Bmasters&usg=AL29H22yFOGKycPS9QFvfIEGAwvK0_8-fg)
Part 2 (http://video.google.ca/url?docid=-2665915773877500927&esrc=sr2&ev=v&q=money+masters&vidurl=http://video.google.ca/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-2665915773877500927%26q%3Dmoney%2Bmasters&usg=AL29H21zQ8KZsXzBLryE00aVFSdEKuiWxQ)
Bill Still the Producer of The Money Master @ The Tax Freedom Rally 8-20-2006 (http://video.google.ca/url?docid=-7027020665149585773&esrc=sr6&ev=v&q=money+masters&vidurl=http://video.google.ca/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-7027020665149585773%26q%3Dmoney%2Bmasters&usg=AL29H23iSwEaCJjDwl15-abtOpj3WBeR3g) This was the last time he would be presenting this info.
So does it identify the first targets for when the revolution comes? or does it not name names...
FACT: An Elite of Bankers Controls the World Economy