GM intervening with RP

[neko kyouran]

you did not play your character from the day it was born.  you started playing it some time in its young adulthood years.  it's not like the character did nothing for the firt years of its life until you came along and created him and set him n game.

no, proper rp is to realize that your character has a background and you should adhere to it.  part of this background is schooling, and unless you're grown up under a rock your whole life, you know that part of schooling is learning the history of the world you live in.  you, as the player learn this from reading the website and it is expected of you as rping your character to realize that the character already knows this as true.

as to the invalid argument of who is to say that that history is false, i simply ask that if you believe that all the history that has been recorded in RL is false or not as well.  If you don't believe we dropped a bomb on Hiroshima that is fine, but the rest of the world is going to call you an ignorant fool and you'll be treated as such.  Facts are, that history did happen. it was written and fleshed out from the team in charge of creating the world, you should treat it as truth.

Again, I get back to my initial point, if your character still refuses to accept all this as fact, then you have already given consent to the consequences of said actions.  In a world where the Gods actively kill those that tick them off past the breaking point, which you are trying to do, then I have no feelings for your character when they get perma-killed from the world as a lesson to the rest of the world's population.

 edit: to me, I see your character as a small child does when it tries to test the limits and boundaries of what it can and can't get away with from the rules set down to him by his parents.  I'm of the strong opinion your character stepped over the line.  When a small child does that, they get sent to the corner for awhile.  Do that in a land where you are defying a god that is known to be real, and the consequences are much worse.

[Coneitic]

the bible is considered a history book.. does that mean its true? i for one belive its true but what makes me right? and i am testing the limits. coneitic may have been taught this in "school" but has never seen any consequences of actions from the gods.. so with that in mind i will keep testing limits and speaking blasphemy till he is taught other wise.. and he will still spread the word of what he belives till he is stopped.

and all this is ooc so it doesnt matter.. coneitic has no clue =)

[Seytra]

the bible is considered a history book.. does that mean its true?

Now you're getting really ridiculous. The bible is not a history book. At best, it is a collection of tales that represent in a highly distorted way the way people were living around that time. It is not a history book that'd deserve the name.

i for one belive its true but what makes me right? and i am testing the limits. coneitic may have been taught this in "school" but has never seen any consequences of actions from the gods.. so with that in mind i will keep testing limits and speaking blasphemy till he is taught other wise..

You are saying the same as "I have never seen the police put anyone in jail for a crime, so I'll commit crimes until I'm put in jail by the police!". Sorry, if you don't believe what people say, and people will have first-hand experience with divine intervention, even if they're just some, then I agree you're acting like a child. However, contrary to neko, I think that it is the player who is acting childish, and the character is just the OOC-ly abused medium for the silliness.

and all this is ooc so it doesnt matter.. coneitic has no clue =)

The discussion is OOC, but the content and the mesage should change the way you "RP" your "character". Or, in fact, make you start RPing, instead of, upon having maxed out the "char", thinking this might justify you going on a power trip.
Sorry to be blunt, but I must say that this is the saddest example of crappy non-RP that I've seen in a while, even though maybe that's just because I haven't been around much for said while.

[neko kyouran]

@coneitic:  again, you reconfirm my point.  you will continue do act as you wish until action is taken.  fair enough, you have that right.  but you also, by doing these actions, given up any valid points you could make when the settings appropriate actions are taken against your character and you turn to the forums to complain about what happened.

So again i say, please have the GM that was involved in whatever that little fiasco in game was correct their un-settings like actions and follow settings precedent by delete/banning all characters that decided to go against Laanx's wishes and still continued to do such even after actions were taken.

[Coneitic]

your example makes no sense. you never see someone go to jail by the police... so normaly you would push your limits till you see it happen. you commit a crime then you a punish and see it.

well coneitic has never seen an act of god and whether its real or not will push the limits till i see an "arrest". if this means bannign then so be it.

[bilbous]

Instead of bannination or deletion just petrify them. I am sure such a punishment could be coded quite quickly. Let them log on all they want but be unable to move or interact in any way more than the petrified kran (unless he actually does more than is readily apparent).

[zanzibar]

heres a nice topic i'd like to discuss and maybe give some insight to the devs thoughts and our own.

Why is the Gm ability so limited? if this game is geared towards quest AND rp then shouldnt the gms have more than the ablity to teleport kick and ban? if a good rp is going on that is acceptable and fun for all players and really gives a chance for new and old players to get involved and enjoy. not saying a planned event necessarily but say a sponaneous one, shouldnt the gm have some options to increase the rp?

in hindsight it would be helping to encourage and push people to rp inbetween quest without taking away from the grind part of the game right?

say someones at the fountain denounce gods.. lol.. persay... would a simple kick/slay/telport really encourage more role play? or maybe a figure posseses the body or say monsters spawn or say the statue moves. something more creative.. it would just encourage more rp right? i dont know hit me back with your responses i'll respond to those and we'll kick off another episode of crossfire.

ps. should i have saved this for the list?

When you are GMing, you are not a player.

[Kerol]

I like that thread. I really do
It's diverse and yet stays on topic more or less.
As I'm completely unimportant and uninvolved in this matter, I shall give my two tria
I fear I have to make a longer statement, sorry for a longer read.

When you are GMing, you are not a player.

Right. That has a few consequences that I will lay out in the following.

Let's see. On one side we have the players. Players are supposed to play the game (and help with testing, but that's not important here) and have fun.
When GMing, you are not online to have fun, but to do your duty, which is:
#1 Moderate player issues.
#2 Promote RP.
#3 Help in testing and other development aspects.

The important part here is undoubtably #2. Now there are two particular cases defined for GMs to fulfill this purpose: a) throwing events and b) help players with their RP.
In the past we did both, a) and b). Nowadays we focus on a). Why? Because the accusation of favouritism (regretfully rightfully) was risen.
That doesn't mean that with a) no favouritism can happen, right. But in those cases it's much easier to detect and get rid of it. How can favouritism happen in player events?
The truth is that GMs *have* friends and people who they like more than others. In matters of rules and moderation this can be circumvented in general by having others handle problems that would obviously call for preoccupation. In matters of RP this is not so easy, as there is no obvious pressure to be uninvolved with the participants.
If you now ask for GMs to become involved with specific RP as player, who would they tend to help in the first place? Right, people who they know and consider good RPers.
Now it is very arguable if those people should get rewards for good RP like PP as we (obviously) don't have a good measure of what is good RP and what is not - just take the many, many discussions on this forum about just this matter.
Here I must say that we GMs mostly have the same idea of what is good RP and what is not, but how to communicate that to players who complain that they don't get help for theirs? In those cases the accusation of favouritism is the next argument - whether right or wrong - and hard to prove wrong.

A small sidenote: The settings as they are laid out on planeshift.it are "reality". You can't argue against the correctness of this information OOC (but of course IC). The *ingame books* are material to RP with and can be argued OOC and IC. Even more so you can debate statements from NPCs.
Second: Both gods (Laanx and Talad) are not supposed to be really present right now in the world, thus impersonating them for such a low cause as denying their existance and calling for prove would be just bad style (except Laanx is bored and likes to smite someone ). On the other side, plundering the temple is a serious matter, but can also be solved without impersonation of a god.
Thirdly: I personally would kick any GM from the team who bans a char for the sake of realism of RP alone. That would be clear abuse and is unacceptable.

Back on topic: Why don't we get involved with RP of players?
As already stated pretty clear by Seytra and others, RP that is supported by GM powers automatically is regarded as official and as measuring rod for others.
But there are different levels of involvement.
Bannage for RP sake clearly is one extreme. Handing out items and PP as reward for RP can be cause of accusations, as said above.
There are also other, "minimal-invasive" means to support RP. The simplest one is verbal "pats on the backs" for good RP or also verbal help in the current RP with advises.
Another is /impersonating NPCs and descriptive actions in the world. This basically means that the GM gets involved with the RP, but not visibly and also not giving rewards.
I see these two minimal-invasive means as upper limit of direct involvement of a GM within a player-driven event - and at the same time as most important aspects of promoting RP.
Everything beyond that needs quality assurance and backup from the settings, otherwise it's just unprofessional.

A last point about labels:
Yes, labels draw attention and make people drop their char personality for yellow label's sake. And yes, we don't like that. It is also true that sometimes the number of participants within an event that was supposed to be small is unrealistic from RP viewpoint.
We will look into the feasibility of having small events without GM labels (and with low rewards) but making it clear at the end of the event that it was official - opposed to "epic" events that also require a lot of participants, where the attention-drawing effect of the labels might be handy.
This also goes within the plan of having more diverse events, so all char-personalities can be involved one time or the other without dropping their usual role.

[Aerianna Kzin]

Another is /impersonating NPCs and descriptive actions in the world. This basically means that the GM gets involved with the RP, but not visibly and also not giving rewards.

that's all I was asking for and some rain too, rain is great .

Also my other idea is  if see somone talking lots of OOC just politely ask them to talk in char, maybe take them aside and explain role play to them, tell them how it enhance the game so much more, maybe even refer them to this site - http://www.planeshift.it/roleplay.html if we as players take the iniciateve to train the noobs and even some of the older players that dont seem to RP then I think in  just a short time we will see a great improvement in the amount and the quality of roleplay.
But then again maybe thats just me.

[Coneitic]

what is you guys' hang up on rewards? stop giving rewards. is that so hard? people still want to rp thats fine they dont thats fine. it kind of sounds like bribes. i mean think of it this way. its like saying hey i logged in everyone come play with me or you wont get something special. as i stated before the events are a joke as far as rp. people only rp it because they want a prize? you think im wrong.. then make an alt thats not a gm, stand in the plaza and call for help on some mobs or claim you are someone. people dont recognize you and it will immediately become a joke itself and maybe one or two will stop to talk but then quickly leave. tho the event may encourage rp for a short time it is bought rp and therefore doesnt seem right... at least not to me.

as far as favoritism.. its spoken like its truely bad. if a gm sees that a player is extremely good with rp and always puts on a great show and keeps it in IC and does it numorous times.. and always helps encourage others to rp...  then explain how helping that person would be so wrong. if people shout favoritism and claim "well you helped him or her with their rp, why cant you help me" then you respond simply with "you havent earned it"

take UTM for example. he has put on countless great rps.. great events great stories. constant encouragement to rp.. and overall i hero to me in the rp community.. so what would his reward be? some pp... a new sword... hell no, a reward would be simple help form gms or devs to create better rps. at this time what is the reward for great rping and constant rping and constant encouragement? nothing.. an event? as i stated those are jokes to rp and i stand by my reason why.

also i want to point out im not questioning what the GM's do. im questioning the system. maybe it wouldnt be so bad to discuss things to change.. you know how this system works.. have you tried other ways... and how many..

  ?

[Piker]

I think the GM events are a great for both regular rp'ers and those that don't so often, why? Encouraging rp is pushing the game and the players in the right direction in my opionion.

Anything that promotes involvement is a good thing

[Coneitic]

read the thread again =)

[bilbous]

Great role play is not always a good show, a great show is not always good role play. A great role play that is of little consequence in the grand scheme of things can go unnoticed for years but remain great role play nonetheless. Contrariwise a grand soap opera may well be entertaining but is it necessarily good role play?

This thread kind of brings to mind that Frasier episode where Niles and Frazier find the down on his luck actor who thrilled their teenage psyches so they produce him in a one man show to much regret. It also brings to mind the Friends episode when Joey gets to be in the movie with the great actor who constantly spits on him.

What I am trying to say is that role play is an art and as such is very much a subjective matter. What impresses you now might not in 10 years. For example, I recently bought the movie "Billy Jack" because I remembered it as a very good, powerful movie when it came out in the 70's. I was delighted to find it at the Walmart for 6 bucks. Having watched it again, I doubt that I will ever watch it again unless I want a good laugh as it now seem nothing more than complete cheese. So go figure.

[Duraza]

Another late response....

no, everything in the settings history is, as far as i can tell in game, IC knowledge, and your characters should be aware of it. 

that was explained in seytra's post btw.  maybe it is not I that do not read things around here, but it is in fact you.

Yes everything in the game is history. However ICly do I have to believe what was stated in history? Think of it from a RL point of view. Does everyone in the world know its history? And even those who do know the history, do they all believe it? Simply the answer is no. One can regard history as fact or fiction and its OOC to believe that everyone must regard PS's history as fact.

the bible is considered a history book.. does that mean its true?

Now you're getting really ridiculous. The bible is not a history book. At best, it is a collection of tales that represent in a highly distorted way the way people were living around that time. It is not a history book that'd deserve the name.

But wouldn't someone who believed in the bible consider it history? Of course they would just as much as someone who didn't would feel it fiction no matter how many people did. PS history is subjectable to the same thing. It is an IC choice whether to always believe what you are told. It doesn't matter that the gods have directly been involved with PS's history so much that people have seen them. A believer of the bible would also feel that god had been involved in their history and that people had seen him. Whether PS's history or not anyone can ICly say anything and believe anything they want. They just have to know that OOCly they are wrong and that ICly there may be consequences.

So again i say, please have the GM that was involved in whatever that little fiasco in game was correct their un-settings like actions and follow settings precedent by delete/banning all characters that decided to go against Laanx's wishes and still continued to do such even after actions were taken.

Instead of bannination or deletion just petrify them. I am sure such a punishment could be coded quite quickly. Let them log on all they want but be unable to move or interact in any way more than the petrified kran (unless he actually does more than is readily apparent).

I like bilbous's idea better. Its not for the fact that I don't want to lose my character (I don't but he does have to die eventually anyways..) but that its better to me. The fact is what if more people started to speak out agaisnt the gods. What if we ICly convinced people? Would Laanx really smight them all? Think of it this way, the kylcros never bent to Laanx. In history he killed many but eventually I believe she gave up on trying to impose her will on them. Why? Else there wouldn't be any kylcros in all of Hydlaa. If Laanx was determined to kill anyone who did not follow her then why wasn't there some kind of massacre of kylcros in the settings? ICly a character could believe that laanx gave up and oocly I was lead to believe the same. So does this mean Laanx would truely kill those who were against her? Maybe but I think it all depends on how Laanx felt at the time. Maybe I'm wrong but nothing in the settings tells me I'm not.

Players need to learn that not everyone can suddenly do something just because on person did it. Its the same when something new is implemented. Suddenly everyone thinks just because its possible they can do it.

They're different. When something becomes implemented, then that does mean "everyone can do that now". However, with something that's not supportable by the implementation, but at the same time is highly unusual and in fact something memorable and therefore settings-altering, then this does mean that it must not be done in the first place.

When something becomes implemented that OOCly means everyone is capable of it. However ICly everyone shouldn't suddenly be able to become expert crafters. Thats not how the world works. Not in RL and it certainly shouldn't be that way in a game trying to be different then other MMORPGs by actually including RP. Sure people will start to learn something thats implemented but everyone shouldn't suddenly get to. Same with winch. Suddenly everyone is able to get into a area mainly for merchants? Everyone doing something that was done in rp and everyone suddenly doing something that was newly implemented is bad in both cases and OOC.

Why is it so unrealstic for players to try and face gods? Yes we wouldn't stand a chance and so are rp must reflect that helplessness. If a god were just to speak to you (as what happened in the rp) then what stops the person who yells against the god from yelling to their face (even though we couldn't see it...)? If the god did smite us then as players we would know that being smited by Laanx isn't something you can just get up from without a care and rp accordingly. However we were not struck down or anything of the sort, we were teleported away and thats what caused us to come back. Sometimes someone who is arrogant enough wouldn't back down because of fear 

The question really is: is it really believable that there's so many people that are sufficiently arrogant?
Next, if Laanx actually were to talk to them, would really all of them still be not only still arrogant, but also not the least bit intimidated?
Next, seeing that people were lowered into the floor already, and that people did get teleported, and "just killed", would one, realistically, still not tone it down at least several notches?

Not at all. If you look at RL a very good example can be brought up. That of the native Americans and the first Europeans to come there. Some of the natives felt the Europeans as gods however when they became threatened did it matter what they faced? No. Surely they still had fear but courage is the means to stand up to something regardless of fear. Thats what they did and thats what we too did. We stood up agaisnt Laanx with courage in that rp, no without fear. Whether we would show fear on our faces is clearly up to us. Also its possible to just not fear at all. Some call that insanity but how well do you know the characters there to really have ICly said they were not scared or that they were insane? That is for you to answer.

In the end the fact is if you don't want this kind of rp to happen then stop it OOCly. However stopping it ICly won't work. It will only promote it in the end  . Also I'd just like to point out that after hearing a lot about how much people don't like "good vs evil" rps (saying its done too much) that this rp was an honest shot at something that differed from the usual. What happens (as I predicted)? From what I can tell it seems that your eager to get rid of it despite the fact that it did encourage rp (I may be wrong...hard to read emotion through words). Nothing in the settings is agaisnt something like this but I doubt most would be happy if they saw it again. So I'd like to clearly state that if anyone is to ever talk about good vs evil battles being boring then I shall kindly point them here for an example of what happens when you go outside that barrier without game mechanics. The fact is good vs evil is all the game mechanics support for rp conflict (and it doesn't do a good job on the evil side). Sure people like nice quiet rps but not everyone and personally I get bored to easily. I will continue to try different kinds of conflicts (including this one) and see just how warmly they are recived regardless of how well I try to get them into the settings. I doubt however that many of them will be accepted at all.

And because I know my words may sound mean depending on the reader I can assure you that is not directed towards anyone, just a statement that I think people should really take the time to think over to get my meaning 

[zanzibar]

I'm impressed with Kerol's post.  This level of open communication is very refreshing and I enjoy seeing it.

Great role play is not always a good show, a great show is not always good role play.

Also very true.