yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 10:29:53 GMT -5
That idea is proposed a lot and I thoroughly dislike it. I don't think there should have to be some coded downside to magick. The playerbase should be responsible enough to be properly superstitious. If you really feel you need a coded punishment for hanging out with magickers in order to justify the exact kind of baseless fear and superstition that has existed throughout real-life human history when it comes to people who are different and difficult to understand, then I don't know what to tell you. I don't want to lower the bar on the players like that.
Do we also need to make it so that spending time with half-elves gives you hives so that people don't mudsex sexy fme breeds with impunity?
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Jul 19, 2016 10:36:05 GMT -5
If the stigma against gickers is purely social and not justified because they are in fact dangerous even when they're trying to be helpful, then befriending a gicker isn't bad it means you're able to overcome prejudice and take advantage of a relationship. It could be something simple like oh you're near a krathi (of whatever new flavor they come in) you have a higher % chance of getting sun sickness which is coded in game. Oh you're near a viv maybe you have a higher chance of getting disarmed because your hands are damp or you get drunk faster or maybe your thirst comes back quicker .
As for breeds, sure code up some STDs and have them come from breeds. That'd be great (if a bit sex centric). In theory the downside to socializing with a half-breed is that a well played half-breed is kind of unstable and has a bunch of baggage so someday they might fuck you over with their breediness.
|
|
yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 10:54:43 GMT -5
If the stigma against gickers is purely social and not justified because they are in fact dangerous even when they're trying to be helpful, then befriending a gicker isn't bad it means you're able to overcome prejudice and take advantage of a relationship. Can you seriously not tell the difference between IC good/bad and OOC good/bad? Befriending a 'gicker might be perfectly moral, even exceedingly so, by our modern Western-society standards here in the real world. "Overcoming prejudice" is seen as a positive thing in our culture. "Overcoming prejudice" is not something that is considered positive in Zalanthas. It means there's something wrong with you because you associate with undesirables. There doesn't have to be a rational reason for undesirables to be undesirable. They just are because that's the way almost everyone in this world has been brought up to think. If you think that prejudices have to be grounded in reality for people to realistically hold onto them, then I wonder what you must think about groups that are discriminated against for being different IRL. I don't think most Zalanthans have an intimate understanding of half-breed psychology. They just probably think that breeds are gross and crazy. This isn't Haven. Not every tiny thing has to be coded to a ridiculous extent.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Jul 19, 2016 11:12:16 GMT -5
You act like I think Haven is a good game or has good incentivizing systems. The fact of the matter is that people ignore the documentation because their actual experiences in game are different. That is why you used to see people make alliances with rogue gickers and shit and benefit greatly from it even though they should be like pissing their pants terrified of a full branched elkros zipping around the desert. This is why Elves in Tuluk achieved absurb levels of power and influence when Sinjinn was in charge.
If there is no actual risk to associating with gickers or supporting elves over humans or dating a breed than it'll happen regardless of documentation. You can't pretend that in the past (haven't played ARM for years) that gicker fear or elf hate or breed hate wasn't a seriously underrepresented thing.
EDIT - Lets not forget that the docs aren't even followed by the staff themselves where House Borsail gained power via gickers, then hates gickers and their involvement in the city? Or any of the other weird double-standard/double-thinks that make very little sense which occur throughout the game.
|
|
yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 11:35:04 GMT -5
I don't know if you think Haven is a good game or what you think about their systems. I'm just making the comparison.
If people are ignoring the documentation--not just playing an exception, but straight-up ignoring it--that's their problem. Sometimes it happens and I've seen it happen, and I've dealt with them in various ways. I can handle poor RPers who say "screw the docs i want my buffs/mudsex lol" a lot better than I can handle a condescending system that forces magicker hate on the playerbase through contrived coded punishment. Besides, poor RPers aren't going to suddenly get better if you do this. They're still going to suck at RP even if they grudgingly "follow the docs" (if you can call it that) to avoid being screwed over by the code. You'll probably just get a lot more of this:
The frizzy-haired gemmer has arrived from the east. The buff, supermanly bald man stands up from the bar. The buff, supermanly bald man walks north.
Hooray for...RP, I guess.
Not everything in the docs makes sense and I don't claim that it does. There are a lot of things I would change and/or make more nuanced. A LOT. But I'd rather see magickers closed for play altogether than see this happen to them. Just get rid of them if the playerbase is too lame to play out a prejudice without having code behind it.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Jul 19, 2016 11:50:40 GMT -5
Is there some reason that you don't think applying some kind of risk to associating with gickers would benefit the game? Wouldn't it enable you to be like. I knew Amos but one day he stood to close to one of them krathi sorts and the gicker was doing his hojo mojo and his flame arms set poor Amos on fire. Gicker said that just happened sometimes. Like when gickers cast (might not be this way still) they would manifest signs of their element and the more powerful they were the more intense the manifestation. Just take that same code. Add a % chance that something bad might happen to a bystander. Bob's your uncle you're set. Then it becomes. Hey be scared of gickers while casting because you never know!
|
|
yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 12:25:00 GMT -5
I don't want that to be the reason people hate magickers. "I hate magickers because sometimes when you're around them, you catch on fire." And they say that because yes, you can codedly catch on fire. And that's the reason to hate witches--because you're codedly punished for being with them. The end.
I like that magicker fear is ignorant and superstitious and requires a little creativity, even if it isn't always played as well as it should be.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Jul 19, 2016 12:46:52 GMT -5
It wouldn't be the only reason. It would be an enforcing reason. Not only that but the playerbase (in the past) has pretty much shown that if there isn't a coded consequence then they'll do whatever they want. It's kind of like a MUSH player saying that you don't need to code in perma-death or combat code because they'd rather deal with the bad RPers than have coded requirements to resolve story.
Instead of adding code though you could always update documentation. You know gickers eat babies, gickers become less human over time, gickers like to mess with mere mortals. Whatever. Like I said in theory half-breeds shouldn't need code because their social stigma backlash is based on them being unstable and untrustworthy. Which is true. Elves likewise are all thieves, it's part of their culture so the social stigma there is also true. Dwarves are all goal obsessed little bastards who don't know how to use punctuation, so the social stigma about them being driven but "selfish" or focused on a specific thing is also true. In theory that means the gicker hate is also true but either documentation doesn't give gickers enough guidelines on how to RP being a soulless abomination or there isn't a coded factor to make it true.
Unless out of all social stigmas in ARM, gickers are the only innocently stigmatized group.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2016 12:59:43 GMT -5
Having code reinforce the prejudices against magick users would be a bonus but subtly or it'd risk 1) exposing hidden elementalists and 2) making using magick too difficult, especially for templars and other "official" magick users, or rogue/outlaw groups who often work together.
It'd be nice if the code were as complex to allow for more diseases and other minor adverse effects like sun sickness (Krath's touch) in the game. Maybe there's a chance of crafters to get splinters, or static shocks, or brand new lights burning out, or equipment getting damaged, or burned. Just a tiny percentage of a chance that spells cast around them could have a higher chance of applying these coded adverse effects to those around them. In a way that it's only noticeable by those with regular contact with elementalists/those who use magick.
It shouldn't be easy to work with someone using magick, but it also shouldn't be extraordinary difficult, only minorly so, in a way that justifies the prejudices. And maybe an occasional blue moon happening where someone is accidentally burned alive, or some other horrific event , to reinforce the stories would be good.
|
|
yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 13:00:38 GMT -5
I suppose I've had a much better experience with the playerbase than you have. If the playerbase did whatever they wanted and associate with whomever they wanted to in order to eke out some advantage, damn the docs to hell, then I wouldn't be playing this game. I think people just get way too worked up over the offenders and start saying that's just the way the playerbase is.
My argument is nothing like the comparison you just made. This is the cultural backdrop that is enforced. Are nobles REALLY inherently better than commoners just because of their birth? No, but that's the social perception. We are playing characters in an ignorant, primitive, almost entirely illiterate society. It makes zero sense to say that all their prejudices have to be reasonable prejudices and their beliefs have to be backed by code. It's condescending to the playerbase and I expect better. And despite what your experiences may have been, I consistently see better.
If there had to be some "incentive" to not hanging out with magickers, I guess I'd make it so that magickers who deeply explore their element (which I guess isn't even possible anymore) are likely to go mad. There might be ways to mitigate it, but magickers would then have the earned reputation of being unpredictable and flying off the handle for no reason, barely kept restrained by the gem, and even then not always so.
As for elves and half-elves and dwarves, I would definitely change a few things about them to make them less rigid if I could, especially half-breeds. Their docs and personality quirks seem contrived to me. I can work with them, but I don't like them.
|
|
yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 13:11:18 GMT -5
I don't really want to argue this point anymore, though. I've said how I feel about it. *shrug*
|
|
jkarr
GDB Superstar
Posts: 2,070
|
Post by jkarr on Jul 19, 2016 13:35:55 GMT -5
I think all that really matters is that your female character isn't expected to be a pretty princess or told that she will always be an inferior fighter and your male character isn't mocked and called less of a man for being a floofy aide. bingo It's still a goddamn tragedy that we lost full guilds. yup. thought itd be cool to have sort of a sliding scale for magickers now, based on how much they focus on their element they may become more witchy and less mundane the more spells they branch, sort of like u lose a skill for each spell u gain, makes for more varied degrees of witch that players cant really sniff while letting full magickers technically be able to exist in game Also I would say that one reason the "hate and fear" docs are enforced is BECAUSE it behooves you to befriend a magicker. If we weren't supposed to hate and fear them then everyone might as well be a magicker because their magickal friends would be buffing them all the time. If you want to play that way, there are certain tribes that allow you to accept the buffs of your tribesmates freely. negative cantrips can keep idiots in line, make it so whenever an offensive spell is cast in room it temporary side effects on pcs in the room or something, could be increased thirst if its a fireball, etc., stjn or stam damage if a wind spell, etc
|
|
yevad
staff puppet account
Posts: 43
|
Post by yevad on Jul 19, 2016 13:57:05 GMT -5
yup. thought itd be cool to have sort of a sliding scale for magickers now, based on how much they focus on their element they may become more witchy and less mundane the more spells they branch, sort of like u lose a skill for each spell u gain, makes for more varied degrees of witch that players cant really sniff while letting full magickers technically be able to exist in game. I'd love that. As for negative cantrips, they could be okay as long as they were done well instead of just a borderline OOC doc-enforcement measure.
|
|
|
Post by Prime Minister Sinister on Jul 19, 2016 16:47:54 GMT -5
The playerbase should be responsible enough to be properly superstitious. Are you new to Armageddon?
|
|
|
Post by Prime Minister Sinister on Jul 19, 2016 16:51:25 GMT -5
My argument is nothing like the comparison you just made. This is the cultural backdrop that is enforced. Are nobles REALLY inherently better than commoners just because of their birth? No, but that's the social perception. We are playing characters in an ignorant, primitive, almost entirely illiterate society. It makes zero sense to say that all their prejudices have to be reasonable prejudices and their beliefs have to be backed by code. It's condescending to the playerbase and I expect better. And despite what your experiences may have been, I consistently see better. Using nobles is an extremely poor example in this case, as there is code in-game that enforces their position. There's a reason people don't get away with not treating a noble like a noble, otherwise they totally would.
|
|