Official: Consent

[Things2Come]

It's official, Gemstone IV is now called DisneyStone IV.

Game Host Innai says, "Verbal insults are not a consent to physical conflict."

[Sean of the Thread]

fuck that..

[Renian]

Sure they are. Romeo and Juliet proves it.

"DO YOU BITE YOUR THUMB AT ME SIR!?!?!?!"

[ELO]

Game Hosts don't know shit.

[Fallen]

That is bullshit. That host doesn't know what he is talking about.

[Jolena]

no, see, if Elementia would tell the entire thing, you would see that it wasn't just about consent to harm. It was about harassment as well. The two characters in question have been at each other for days, talking shit, harassing each other verbally, etc. Granted, the other character started all this BS, but Elementia having her familiar follow him around constantly IS harassment no matter how you put it.

People seriously need to accept responsibility for their actions. Just because one character starts it and is wrong (and is harassing I might add, because I do realize he was harassing her), doesn't mean that Elementia can harass in turn. Each of them has to own up to their BS, and for some damned reason, it fails to sink into the brain.

Edited to add in that the entire reason Elementia is so pissed off is because GH Innai basically pwned her by telling her that she violated TOS with the whole harassment issue. She figures if she called for the assist, she should not be chastised or corrected in her own actions. How do I know this you might ask? Because she bitched about it on OOC for a good half hour, and said as much.

[ELO]

Things2Come = Elementia = GSWIZARDS?

That would explain a lot...

[Stunseed]

Things2Come = Elementia = GSWIZARDS?

That would explain a lot...

It's like seeing the light.

[ELO]

Edited to add in that the entire reason Elementia is so pissed off is because GH Innai basically pwned her by telling her that she violated TOS with the whole harassment issue.

Why does she even play? With all the bitching and complaining she does on the officials, there's no way in hell she could enjoy Gemstone.



Because she bitched about it on OOC for a good half hour, and said as much.

Yet another reason I don't bother asking Jamus to unban me.

[Things2Come]

no, see, if Elementia would tell the entire thing, you would see that it wasn't just about consent to harm. It was about harassment as well. The two characters in question have been at each other for days, talking shit, harassing each other verbally, etc. Granted, the other character started all this BS, but Elementia having her familiar follow him around constantly IS harassment no matter how you put it.

People seriously need to accept responsibility for their actions. Just because one character starts it and is wrong (and is harassing I might add, because I do realize he was harassing her), doesn't mean that Elementia can harass in turn. Each of them has to own up to their BS, and for some damned reason, it fails to sink into the brain.



I wasn't trying to harass him, I wanted to kill him. He wouldn't leave town long enough for me to accomplish this task, so I had my familiar follow him so I could get him the instant he was vulnerable. It's not like this went on for days. It went on for maybe 30 minutes.

If someone is consistantly spouting off at the mouth, I don't see an issue with following them around and doing something about it. If someone was being followed day, after day, that would be considered harassment, however I wasn't doing that.




Edited to add in that the entire reason Elementia is so pissed off is because GH Innai basically pwned her by telling her that she violated TOS with the whole harassment issue. She figures if she called for the assist, she should not be chastised or corrected in her own actions. How do I know this you might ask? Because she bitched about it on OOC for a good half hour, and said as much.


I asked her if anything I did was against policy, or close to it...

You ask, "Just so I'm clear, were any of my actions in violation of policy, or close?"

She stated ...

Game Host Innai says, "Setting your familiar to continually follow someone you are in a conflict is a form of harassment, which is against the terms of service."

I was not upset about that fact. I would rather know, than not know and take a chance of violating policy. I was not issued any sort of warning.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was upset about the following...

(Me telling about the incidents that lead up to this, and the things Elementz has been saying...)
You say, "I sent my familiar to him because he died."
(I was going to rescue him and be nice.)
Innai asks, "Have you had your familiars follow him at any other time?"
You say, "Not before that."
Innai asks, "And what about after that?"
You say, "I've had one on him today."
(Not the entire day, just for a short while, this evening.)
Innai asks, "Have either of you ever attacked the other?"
You say, "I've cast stone fist at him."
Innai asks, "When did that happen?"
You ask, "You're not interested in the history of the situation any longer?"
You say, "Or what he's stated up to this point."
You say, "The warnings that I've given him."
You ask, "Or when I asked if he wanted to stop the conflict, by not insulting my character?"
You ask, "An ooc whisper, which he replied to outloud, in the park, in front of a room full of people?"
Innai says, "We're trying to get all the details we can, Elementia."
Innai says, "Trust me when I'm saying that the questions I'm asking are relevant to the situation."

At this point I felt the assist was not going in the direction I intended. It felt like I was becoming the subject matter instead of Elementz. It was as if she was playing a detective, trying to dig out details to form a case and file charges on me, instead of allowing me to explain the situation in full detail.

It did turn a different direction however.

You say, "Sorry, but this is very frustrating to me."
Innai says, "I understand. We definitely do not like to see this kind of thing happen."
Innai says, "Here is what we can do."
Innai asks, "Have you WARNed Elementz?"
You say, "As soon as I saw he assisted, telling me he wants no further interaction, yes."
You say, "I also, want no further interaction, if he doesn't want to roleplay the situation."
Innai says, "Well, an assist can be about any number of things."
Innai says, "But if you WARNed him, that means you need to stop interacting with him completely."
You say, "I have already."
You say, "My familiar is no longer following him."
Innai says, "Okay. Hopefully this is where it ends, then, and you two can go your separate ways."
Innai says, "I think it's apparent that this situation can't be solved with RP."
Innai says, "Do you understand that this means no further interaction of any kind? That means familiars, thoughts, gating, talking about him to other characters... anything."
Innai says, "If he should continue to attemtp to interact with you, you need to ignore him completely, and use REPORT and ASSIST."
You say, "I understand what I have to do completely, although I doubt the other party is going to do what's required."
Innai says, "If he doesn't, then please let us know."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which brings us to the TOS comment.

One of the last comments ...

Innai says, "That's really not the same as expressly stating that he wishes to continue an IC conflict, which this definitely was not."

In response to ...

You quietly whisper to Elementz, "Ooc You're treading a very thin line with my character. If you're not wanting to roleplay a conflict with her, it would be wise for your character to choose to act differently in front of her."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Make sure whoever you're in conflict with expressly states they wish to continue an IC conflict, or don't kill them. Even if you warn them multiple times that their actions are not welcome to your character.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Various Elementz comments...

Serawyn asks, "Elementz do you know who the owl is?"
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly asks, "No?"
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "But I bets it Elementia."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "She's a big loser."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "She thinks she had my name first."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Yet she doesn't realize that I've had it for much longer than she."
Serawyn says, "She don't even have a last name."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly asks, "Do they not do last names anymore?"
Dulinarr says, "Nope."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Sweeeeet."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "I'm so cool."



You trace a series of glowing runes while chanting the phrase for Familiar Gate...
You gesture.
A swirling grey-blue mist slowly fills the area. It begins to spin faster and faster, congealing into a large upright disk. The mist

slows its spinning and within the swirling vapors you can make out an opening.
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.

The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Hahaha."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "I knewi t."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "What a loser."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Elementia is a poser and a wannabe."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "On top of that she's a nobody."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warning...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Speaking to Elementz, you say, "Please keep up with the insults, I'm counting each one and you'll die once for each."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Ok thats fine Elementia."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Go ahead and do whatever you want."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "You'll have a LONG list of people after you for each death you cause me."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "You sure do have alot of time to wast."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Yer owl's just as ugly as ye are."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Why don't you just go back to whatever slime hole you oozed out of."
The ghostly voice of Elementz darkly says, "Yer owl is just as lazy as ye too."


Elementz darkly says, "I can't stand invisible losers."
Elementz darkly says, "And those who hide behind familiar."
Elementz darkly says, "Someone's got WAY too much time on her hands."
Elementz darkly says, "Prolly eating some fattening food blowing time getting fatter."

[Jolena]

So basically, you were sicking your owl to watch him and listen to him insult you for doing so, then you hide in invisibility to listen to him insult you, and then you whine about it?

No offense, but if you don't want to have anything to do with someone, you do NOT send your familiar to follow them around, nor do you hide in invisibility and watch them. You obviously have a great deal of interest in him, or you would not have done it.

I'm not for one second saying that Elementz wasn't being an ass, because he was. What I am saying however, is that when you realized he won't RP out the conflict, and you realized that he wouldn't respond to OOC whispers appropriately, why the hell did you continue this shit? It seems to me you like the drama.

Also, when a GH asks questions about a situation, there is normally relevance to it. They need to know when you casted, and that probably would have been followed by asking you WHY you casted. You were just too quick to jump in with the whining about 'You aren't even going to ask this and this and what about this too?' that it never entered your mind.

[vontez]

ok...seriously...i just need to know...is elementia a GUY, or a CHICK!? it is so mind-boggling and netrual gender!

[Gan]

a guy playing a chick

[StrayRogue]

What a fucking stupid thread.

[Drew]

If someone annoys you, don't be a pussy and wait until they go out of town, just kill them.

[Danical]

If someone annoys you, don't be a pussy and wait until they go out of town, just kill them.

Seconded.

[FinisWolf]

So, lets see ...

Two retarded people, with retarded names, got it.

Sorta joking ...

Anyway, I have been told verbal comments, regardless of what they are is not permission for CvC (Zyllah), and then later when a GH was assisting another that my char had killed, I was invis and walked in on th convo long enough to overhear the GH tell the vic that his shit talking was consent. So it depends on the GH/GM responding. If Zyllah is on, I can't do anything close to CvC with any of my chars this includes sleep and hand of tonis. I slept one person one night and immediately got a send, Keep your spells to yourself.

Anyway, just thought I would share.

Finis

[FinisWolf]

If someone annoys you, don't be a pussy and wait until they go out of town, just kill them.

Needed repeated ... I have never let the town boundaries effect an rp conflict.

Finis

[Sean of the Thread]

Needed repeated ... I have never let the town boundaries effect an rp conflict.

Finis

Sometimes that is half the fun... tracking them down outside the gate or :cough: ambushing Atreau when he swims to the ducts because he is a hiding pussy :cough:

[TheEschaton]

Cause Finiswolf is such a fantastic name. ;)

Only topped by Filiswolf.

[thornhappy]

Looks like you're both winners.

Fighting over who had the extremely uncreative name first? Come on.

He's obviously being OOC.. and insulting you in an OOC fashion.

So there's a simple way to deal with this. LEAVE HIM THE FUCK ALONE AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE. Sitting there listening to him and fighting back isn't going to make the situation any better for you.

I really love threads that start out with something simple and then the REAL story comes out.

[Things2Come]

So basically, you were sicking your owl to watch him and listen to him insult you for doing so, then you hide in invisibility to listen to him insult you, and then you whine about it?

No offense, but if you don't want to have anything to do with someone, you do NOT send your familiar to follow them around, nor do you hide in invisibility and watch them. You obviously have a great deal of interest in him, or you would not have done it.


I did want something to do with him at the beginning. At the point where he called a Game Host, I no longer wanted anything to do with the situation. As it was clear at that point that he didn't want to take part in this conflict. At no time prior to that did he notify me with this information. If he didn't insult me every chance that he got, and instead went about his business whenever we happened to pass in the same room, I would have left him alone.



I'm not for one second saying that Elementz wasn't being an ass, because he was. What I am saying however, is that when you realized he won't RP out the conflict, and you realized that he wouldn't respond to OOC whispers appropriately, why the hell did you continue this shit? It seems to me you like the drama.


Consentual conflict can sometimes be enjoyed by both parties. He was obviously enjoying making insults to and about my character. I was going to enjoy strangling him with a stone fist.

In the future, I'll just report the person for being OOC, warn interact, and carry on with my life. I guess roleplaying really doesn't exist in this game.



Also, when a GH asks questions about a situation, there is normally relevance to it. They need to know when you casted, and that probably would have been followed by asking you WHY you casted. You were just too quick to jump in with the whining about 'You aren't even going to ask this and this and what about this too?' that it never entered your mind.


I didn't provide it in my last post, but I was giving the information about WHY I cast up to that point. I felt that, instead of being here to assist me and take down the information I was trying to give her. She was instead following up and looking for more information about how wrong I was. Her questions were not relevant to the conversation at that time. She jumped directly to, did you follow him, did you cast at him, did you ... When I was stating what the history of the situation was, what actions he had taken up to that point, eventually leading up to my actions where they fit into the situation.

When there are two people in a conflict, you need to listen to both sides of the story. Instead, she used the information she had just received to question me further on behalf of Elementz, or at least that's the way it felt. It didn't really feel like she was listening to anything I was saying. She saw that I was higher level, I had a familiar follow him, I attacked him, and that he could do, or had done, no wrong IMO.

Maybe I just don't understand ...

Do any of you allow your characters to be harassed and insulted and not do anything about it? Elementz was partially OOC, and partially IC. He was a dark elf, I just figured he was a nasty one. Many people do roleplay that aspect, I'm sure they also have conflicts.

Either way, from this point forward, this is going to be DisneyStone for me. No conflicts whatsoever, if one is created, it's report, warn, assist and ignore. I wonder what a perfect world, where nothing ever goes wrong and everyone always gets along is like?

[StrayRogue]

Looks like you're both winners.

Fighting over who had the extremely uncreative name first? Come on.

He's obviously being OOC.. and insulting you in an OOC fashion.

So there's a simple way to deal with this. LEAVE HIM THE FUCK ALONE AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE. Sitting there listening to him and fighting back isn't going to make the situation any better for you.

I really love threads that start out with something simple and then the REAL story comes out.

Amen.

[Sean of the Thread]

Do any of you allow your characters to be harassed and insulted and not do anything about it?

One of mine would respond in an instant nonchalant 720 and carry on as if nothing happened. Another would give a spit or kick and run like hell. Never would it sit there accept it tho.



Either way, from this point forward, this is going to be DisneyStone for me. No conflicts whatsoever, if one is created, it's report, warn, assist and ignore. I wonder what a perfect world, where nothing ever goes wrong and everyone always gets along is like?

Sucks doesn't it :( This game used to be great because the population policed itself.. now it's kiddies talking shit and being report whores.

[Stanley Burrell]

I thought this was going to be a thread about a new verb for having teh consensual PvP hot cyb0r sex0r. How disappointing :(

[Nilandia]

Maybe I just don't understand ...

You're right. You don't understand.

The job of the Host is to find out everything that happened, not just what you're telling them. This includes figuring out everything you did during the course of events.

Hosts would have been doing no one any favors if we took someone's word on face value and didn't delve into the information we need but you might not know we need: all of your actions and your motivations. Our goal is not to find out where you went wrong so we can punish you for a misstep. It's to get as much of the picture as possible.

Having worked with Innai when I was a Host, I can tell you from personal experience that she has a passion for helping people and for the game. She wants to do the best job possible and she does it darned well. Innai is one of the best Hosts out there, and I was glad to work with her.

Gretchen

[Jolena]

Looks like you're both winners.

Fighting over who had the extremely uncreative name first? Come on.

He's obviously being OOC.. and insulting you in an OOC fashion.

So there's a simple way to deal with this. LEAVE HIM THE FUCK ALONE AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIFE. Sitting there listening to him and fighting back isn't going to make the situation any better for you.

I really love threads that start out with something simple and then the REAL story comes out.

Bears repeating, and another Amen.

[Shari]

As soon as someone starts using blatant ooc shit to initiate an argument in-game, they get ignored.

Why people would continue to draw it out is just completely beyond me.

[FinisWolf]

Cause Finiswolf is such a fantastic name. ;)

Only topped by Filiswolf.


I agree, both names suck, and I wish I could change the names (as I have said in many other threads/posts. And FYI ... it's Filswolf (all you had to do was look at my Name, and Custom Name to see the correct spellings).

Anyway, if SIMU would let me I would drop WOLF on both names, but alas, they won't.

Finis

[FinisWolf]

Either way, from this point forward, this is going to be DisneyStone for me. No conflicts whatsoever, if one is created, it's report, warn, assist and ignore. I wonder what a perfect world, where nothing ever goes wrong and everyone always gets along is like?


As soon as someone starts using blatant ooc shit to initiate an argument in-game, they get ignored.

Why people would continue to draw it out is just completely beyond me.

This really answers your questions. If someone goes OOC, leave because they are the most likely NOT to RP a situation. I have ran into both types of people playing characters, it's a risk to CvC with unknown individuals, but lowering yourself to their level, in my opinion, is NOT the answer. Sometimes that means speaking/talking/arguing with a GH/GM. To charge your whole RP is also not an answer, again that's in my opinion.

Finis

[Jolena]

I can't understand how she didn't know that he was being OOC with this conflict, before the GH came into play, to begin with. It was very obvious to me.

[TheEschaton]

Yeah, my cleric's last name is Clericfriend. Thank God for hidelastname.

-TheE-

[FinisWolf]

I can't understand how she didn't know that he was being OOC with this conflict, before the GH came into play, to begin with. It was very obvious to me.

From the little I read, I would have walked away.

I recall one conflict Fils had in the broken tower where the guy was so OOC it was beyond disgusting. Example: [memory, not log] He says to Fils, "I wish I could fucking slap you through my monitor." And that was a pretty tame one. It had all started cause my friend said his name (which someone else had already said), he went off, how do you know my name, just because you read it on your screen ... blah blah blah.

Had he followed, I would have taken that as a threat by him, and incapacitated him.

If he continued his idiocy, death would be imminent.

I avoid reporting conflict and interactions like the plague.

[AestheticDeath]

Ive always hated reporting. GMs and GHs do next to nothing. And if they do by some miracle do something... You wont ever know it. As they have that stupid policy about not telling what/how they do things.

And to do the warn interact thing... is absurd. Not being able to talk to friends about them, or be in the same room etc.. You basically have to re-think your whole fucking game play, just because some lame ass idiot isnt being taken care of properly.

[Jolena]

I think that the reasoning behind not talking about them or being in the same room as them is sound. If you want NO further contact with them then that is just what it means. Why continue the conflict by speaking about them to others? If you want nothing to do with them, doesn't it make sense to just not say another word and put it out of your mind?

As to the report issue, I have reported twice in my time playing GS, and the last time was a few years ago. It was due to a blatantly OOC character who was harassing me constantly. It stopped and I never had to deal with it again. I don't think that you should never use report, but it shouldn't be used so frequently either. That being said, if she had just recognized that it was a moron behind Elementz who did not wish to Rp and was being blatantly OOC and irrational, and then walked away from him and ignored it, it probably would have been a lot better for her. When it becomes obvious (and in my opinion it WAS obvious) that the other party is NOT capable of RPing something with you, why bother to continue it?

[Miss X]

The policy about not discussing it with others is 100% logical. I certainly don't want anyone discussing my details with other players. You'll find this policy in existence within most organisations.

Regarding warn interact, if you're serious enough to want to cease all interaction with another player, it strikes me as odd if you continue to talk about this person with others. You want to act as if this person doesn't exist, surely?

The moving from the same room tends to depend on the room itself. For example, if you're in a main meeting place it's probably unreasonable to expect anyone to move. However, if the person you've warned starts to cause trouble with you it's probably a wise idea to remove yourself from the situation and then ASSIST to give the details. It's not rocket science.

[AestheticDeath]

So if someones a jackass, who likes to cause problems - it doesnt matter? You cant warn your friends about them? You cant discuss the bad day you had? And why, who it involved etc? BS..

As far as warn interact, in my view its just to get the asshole outta your way. Kinda like putting them in jail. People just simply do not cease to exist. They were, they are and they will be. Even if its only in memories. So I dont wanna play kickball with Johnny... doesnt mean he isnt still running around the playground, and that I wont see him. Pretending he isnt there is lame.

Johnny comes over and takes my ball, ima damn well knock him out. Specially if all teacher does is slap his hand, give the ball back and say "Stop that Johnny". At some point, you gotta take up for yourself, and stop asking people to give Johnny a talking. Talking does nothing in most instances. If you could talk it out.. it usually doesnt end up blowing into a big ordeal in the first place.

I think the deaths sting should be removed if ts CvC. And then the population should have more control over policing fellow players. It shouldnt always come down to having GMs step in, or tell you not to interact whatsoever with the other person(s).

I should be 100% free to help out my friends in a CvC or pvp conflict. Especially if hes being picked on by someone older.

[Jolena]

Unfortunately, that is NOT how things work in Gemstone however. And when you agree to the TOS, you are kinda stuck with the way things work in the TOS and how they handle situations.

[thornhappy]

Frankly, TOS sucks. Welcome to DisneyStone.. Only not. I behaved myself when I was a n00b for the simple fact that I was scared SHITLESS of Lords and Ladies and what they could do to me.

Unfortunately, player-policing is a lot more difficult these days for a multitude of reasons... (the rampant sales of high-level characters, the newb-tards that've managed to get to high level - some without speaking to a single soul to learn what RP even is...)

Basically, if they're a self-riteous whiner that goes to the staff when they're the ones at fault, etc.. You're screwed. Killing them doesn't mean anything and will just get you in trouble. Just have to move on and grit your teeth. They'll troll elsewhere eventually.

Unfortunately, Johnny can take your ball and play with it right in front of you. And if you punch him out.. He's still going to have your ball.

I love RP conflict. I hate idiots that don't understand the concept.

Here ends my rant.

[AestheticDeath]

I understand that, probably more then some as I am one of the non-rpers who buys capped characters.

But just because a newbie buys one doesnt mean he knows how to play it successfully. There are any number of other capped guys/gals out there. And they can and will enforce some sort of order if needed. "Theres always someone bigger or better." If not, theres always the greater numbers thing.
And you dont have to be capped to kill a capped character.

Not saying it will happen, but it could work if implemented.

[thornhappy]

OH. And I especially despise when something starts out as a roleplayed conflict... and suddenly they begin spouting randomly obnoxious OOC crap or log in their other character to deal with it. :(

I've run into this many times... especially with the Rangeress's 'guardian ala love' getting into trouble in the park like he does.

Each IC argument has the potential to explode into something OOC that I don't want to deal with. I never can tell anymore, and I hate whispering OOC to every single person to make sure they're 'OK'.. I'm just not that nice, nor do I care unless it impacts me... which, when they flip out and cry to the staff, certainly does.

The worst part is, this shit happens even with verbal-only conflicts that are quite OBVIOUSLY IC...

It's especially irritating when they're the ones who instigated it to begin with, which is probably 85% of the time.


PS: Maselon is my character's son.. heh.. You may not be the greatest roleplayer but you're certainly not one of 'them'. I don't support it at ALL, but your buying of characters is certainly not what makes this approach inefficient, it's the idiots that you may chance to sell them TO. It's not like you can do a damn background check on these fools.

[Caramia]

Wow... this is seriously retarded. You're going to argue about something OOC, in the game, and try to call it RP, IC, and CvC?

With regard to the initial post about an insult not being consent to conflict, then perhaps you misunderstood that simply being insulted -- one time -- by someone is a limp excuse for engaging in CvC. If you're going to play a character so easily twisted by the words of another then you're just going to set yourself up as a target with an itchy trigger finger, and the snerts and griefers will have fun irking you.

On the other hand, if someone is tossing out several insults and they're all IC and roleplayed, instead of the OOC crap in that log, then feel free to warn them that if they continue on their current path, they're bound to meet up with an accident. At least then you've engaged them and let them know that if they keep going, there are repercussions.

[Sean of the Thread]

Hire someone to kill them just to complicate matters and make it more retarded.

[Stanley Burrell]

I like Renian's comment.

[Orendis]

It's official, Gemstone IV is now called DisneyStone IV.

Game Host Innai says, "Verbal insults are not a consent to physical conflict."

I must be missing something. In what social situation, real or simulated, is an insult an immediate justification for a physical attack? Having perused this thread, it seems like you're angry at Innai for doing her job the right way. As I understand it, Hosts are constrained by a pretty strict set of rules regarding what they can or cannot say to customers: they must act within the grounds of policy. (Hint: as a customer of GemStone, so should you.)

Not only are you engaging in a classic example of "kill the messenger," you're also incorrect.

Regarding behaving properly in-game, I'm sure someone will invoke the "I'm a paying customer; I can do what I want!" argument, so to slay it stillborn: no, you can't. The game has rules. Just as you can't walk into a country club of which you're a member and take a dump on the tennis courts without being escorted off the premises, you can't behave like an idiot in our game without getting kicked to the curb.

Tierus's Dream Daemon

[Meges]

I must be missing something. In what social situation, real or simulated, is an insult an immediate justification for a physical attack? Having perused this thread, it seems like you're angry at Innai for doing her job the right way. As I understand it, Hosts are constrained by a pretty strict set of rules regarding what they can or cannot say to customers: they must act within the grounds of policy. (Hint: as a customer of GemStone, so should you.)

Not only are you engaging in a classic example of "kill the messenger," you're also incorrect.

Regarding behaving properly in-game, I'm sure someone will invoke the "I'm a paying customer; I can do what I want!" argument, so to slay it stillborn: no, you can't. The game has rules. Just as you can't walk into a country club of which you're a member and take a dump on the tennis courts without being escorted off the premises, you can't behave like an idiot in our game without getting kicked to the curb.

Tierus's Dream Daemon

I have to agree with Satan. You are a part of this game and its rules and everyone who has joined this game has done so while consenting to the rules that govern it. Read what you "sign."

However, that does not negate the fact that there are indeed idiots roaming about. Too bad GemStone does not have roaming fees.


Meges

[Atlanteax]

If you dislike what someone is saying to you, or about you...

Speak up to him/her about it... express your dissatisfication... and if it persists, utilize the Challenge verb and an adequate pause before following through on any physical threat.

.

Seriously, you cannot just simply physically attack someone for looking at you the wrong way, or talking negatively about you without no constructive interaction on your part.

[Sean of the Thread]

Bunch of carebears. Do people really use the challenge verb and give adequate pause before physical action?

[Landrion]

I havent noticed Gswizards posting on the officials lately. Walk away from Gem in disgust for a while? or did the incident blossom into an enforced break?

[Rathain]

Game Host Innai says, "Verbal insults are not a consent to physical conflict."



SEND[Emeradan] I've actually been observing your behavior for some time. Being passive-aggressive on the amulet and not expecting reprisal isn't realistic... if you're going to RP such behavior, I would suggest expecting a response. You're more than welcome to follow through with further info via your current ASSIST

Received the lower response from a new player who, after reading policy, still does not understand how it is enforced. Verbal insults, are apparently, consent to CvC.

[Jolena]

As was stated previously in this thread, GM's vary greatly on their stance with this particular issue. I've been told that it does give consent by a GM, and that it doesn't by yet another. :shrug:

[Joe]

I don't see how any reasonable person would have their character kill another for one insult. A bevy of them, however, and I could see how they'd have their character respond in kind. That's just me, though.

[SpunGirl]

Considering that the OOC nature of Element'z commentary was a large part of Elementia's complaint, I can't see how her actions against him could be anything except for PvP. Not to mention the fact that he was saying these things ABOUT her, not TO her, because she was using her familiar to stalk and harass him.

She may not have liked the things he had to say, but I'm not sure how that becomes grounds for a physical attack.

-K

[Kainen]

I don't see how any reasonable person would have their character kill another for one insult. A bevy of them, however, and I could see how they'd have their character respond in kind. That's just me, though.

GS is loosely based on medieval times.. and people thought NOTHING back then of killing over an insult. Especially if the person who was insulted was highborn or a knight, or even just thought of themselves highly.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I've been told that issuing an insult related to killing is grounds for killing.

"Oh yeah, you couldn't even cut me with that pathetic scrap of metal you call a knife!" is a challenge and can be taken to CvC.

'Those shoes don't go with your outfit" however shouldn't be.. though to some that could be construed as an insult, it doesn't make much sense to kill someone for that and letting people get away with stuff like that could ruin the game for many.

[Nilandia]

GS is loosely based on medieval times.. and people thought NOTHING back then of killing over an insult. Especially if the person who was insulted was highborn or a knight, or even just thought of themselves highly.
Not intending this as a personal challenge to you, Kainen, but rather questioning the thought process behind what you wrote.

I've seen this many times to justify killing people for a wrong turn of phrase or something equally petty, but to be honest, I really don't know if it's true.

Does anyone have any evidence to back up the claim that it was common during the Middle Ages for one person to kill another at the drop of a hat?

To my mind, killing people on a whim was not only against the morals of the time, but it made no real sense.

A noble can't kill another noble without major political implications, especially if the target comes from a powerful family, so such actions will have to be weighed carefully. Going around killing other nobles for perceived insults will definitely get you a bad reputation.

A noble can probably get away with killing a serf from his fief every once in a while, but one would think that killing too many would cause the noble to get a reputation for cruelty and working his serfs to death, which can have social consequences. Killing a serf from another fief can be construed as stealing from the lord of that fief, which again can have negative consequences.

A commoner definitely can't kill a noble without his own life being forfeit. A commoner might be able to get away with killing another commoner once or twice, but past that, a community can very well band together to cast the killer out. Given that commoners rarely traveled more than a few miles in their lives, being cast out would definitely be something to avoid.

Seriously, if people were so flippant with death and killing other people, one wonders how the population managed to stay constant, much less rise as it did.

So can anyone point to hard evidence rather than just supposition?

Gretchen

[StrayRogue]

I imagine it's a similar misconception to that of the Gladiators in ancient Rome: few fights were to the death, and fatalities were actually quite rare. Hurrah Hollywood.

[Caede]

I've been told that issuing an insult related to killing is grounds for killing.

"Oh yeah, you couldn't even cut me with that pathetic scrap of metal you call a knife!" is a challenge and can be taken to CvC.

'Those shoes don't go with your outfit" however shouldn't be.. though to some that could be construed as an insult, it doesn't make much sense to kill someone for that and letting people get away with stuff like that could ruin the game for many.

A disgruntled cobbler leaps from hiding to attack!
The disgruntled cobbler swings a battered shoe-horn at you!
AS: +414 vs DS: +171 with AvD: +32 + d100 roll: +100 = +375
... and hits for 114 points of damage!
Shot knocks your head back by pushing on the inside of the skull!
It seems you have died, my friend. Although you cannot do anything, you are keenly aware of what is going on around you...

A disgruntled cobbler kicks some dirt on your corpse.

A disgruntled cobbler says, "I spent three weeks becoming a master cobbler so that I could cobble those shoes to match my outfit! How dare you!"

/nothingtoreallyadd

[Aaysia]

'Those shoes don't go with your outfit".

>cman bitchslap

Caede's post made me giggle.

[Leetahkin]

Heh. Entress's brother returned to the lands last night, and bs ensued right away. Some idiot Entress didn't know started asking how the hell they could be siblings, as she's Half-Elf/Half-Sylvan and he's Dark Elf. (using the profile verb, much?) Like anyone cares, but he adopted Entress a few years ago as his sister. So while not blood related, they are still very much brother/sister.

He kept running his mouth, then some chick started butting in, I told them both to shut up and mind their own business. They didn't. They started insulting others in town, which pissed them off. Needless to say, I killed them both. And got the warn interact from both. Good times.

They also did an assist last night to whine about it. :loser:

Oh yeah, she also spouted off ooc comments aloud while dead. Surprised the heck out of me, and made me laugh at how ooc she became. I never even knew she existed until last night, or her male friend who decided my family/business was his.

But yeah, I find constant running of your mouth consent.

I may post the log of above this weekend. Not sure yet if I want to go through the trouble.

[Caede]

Okay, I thought about this a little and wanted to write a quick response.


Not intending this as a personal challenge to you, Kainen, but rather questioning the thought process behind what you wrote.

I've seen this many times to justify killing people for a wrong turn of phrase or something equally petty, but to be honest, I really don't know if it's true.

Does anyone have any evidence to back up the claim that it was common during the Middle Ages for one person to kill another at the drop of a hat?

This is an interesting point. Certainly there are numerous descriptions of horrific violence for random reasons in the middle ages (both in paintings, engravings, writing, etc); the first that comes to my mind is Song of Roland, which is an incredibly bloody tale filled with death both Noble and not. Admittedly, this focuses on battles but a lot of the sentiment behind the killings could have easily taken place off the battlefield. One thing that's missing from Gemstone, though, is all the weeping and fainting.

Okay, Song of Roland is a bad example, since it's from the dark ages rather than the middle ages, but in truth the versions most people know were written in the middle ages, and thus have more the flavor of the middle ages. Really I just wanted to mention the fainting, weeping, and dying of grief. What wussy men, those Frankish warriors were.

Going back further we have stories like Beowulf, Song of Aneurin, the Norse eddas, the Mabinogion, ad infinitum back into history both real and fictional.

I think the difficult part here is trying to reconcile what we consider insults in Gemstone with what were actually considered insults in the middle ages (and earlier). My facetious post about a cobbler attacking may not be that far fetched -- think of a peasant who spurns a blacksmith's work. Might that blacksmith take his hammer to the peasants head?

Certainly anyone of higher-born status treated peasants and serfs with indifference, akin to a master/slave relationship.




To my mind, killing people on a whim was not only against the morals of the time, but it made no real sense.

A noble can't kill another noble without major political implications, especially if the target comes from a powerful family, so such actions will have to be weighed carefully. Going around killing other nobles for perceived insults will definitely get you a bad reputation.


One name: Vlad Tepes. He killed masses of peasants, nobles and even monks for the most trivial reasons, or so we are told. Was he unique in his time? Absolutely not. There are tales of the Turks from the same period of equally astonishing brutality.



A noble can probably get away with killing a serf from his fief every once in a while, but one would think that killing too many would cause the noble to get a reputation for cruelty and working his serfs to death, which can have social consequences. Killing a serf from another fief can be construed as stealing from the lord of that fief, which again can have negative consequences.


In addition to ol' Vlad, I'll give you a quick example off the top of my head, relative to slavery in the US, circa the Civil War. Dr. Mudd, possible accomplice to John Wilkes Booth, was reported to have routinely beaten and whipped his slaves for very minor infractions. This from a man who quoted his Hippocratic Oath as the reason why he aided Booth in his flight. Do you think going back further in time would make people more civilized, their violence less pronounced?




A commoner definitely can't kill a noble without his own life being forfeit. A commoner might be able to get away with killing another commoner once or twice, but past that, a community can very well band together to cast the killer out. Given that commoners rarely traveled more than a few miles in their lives, being cast out would definitely be something to avoid.


No disagreement here.



Seriously, if people were so flippant with death and killing other people, one wonders how the population managed to stay constant, much less rise as it did.

Humanity can, did and will absorb a lot of death.

[CrystalTears]

Considering that death isn't permanent in GS, I don't see what the big deal is. :shrug:

[Rathain]

That's part of the problem. Few RP the signifigance of death. This is due largely in part to a high number of clerics who indescriminantly raise anyone in sight. As I was once told by someone who played a human character married to a giant, had a halfling brother, two elven sons and a krolvin daughter, they see themselves as part of one large, happy family, because it makes them .. well, happy. This is the atmosphere, that unfortunately, kills the uniqueness of cross cultural, racial, and deity driven RP that can effect the perception of death.

Feel free to post the log of the events Leetahkin. Their reaction was disappointing and OOC at times, but their comments were far from enough to initiate the death parade you gave. From the comments I heard - if you don't want people commenting on your family, don't announce your issues on the amunet or sit in the middle of town arguing - it attracts attention. Those two you killed were not the only ones commenting on your affairs. They were however, the two youngest characters who commented on your affairs.

[CrystalTears]

No matter how dramatic you make the rez, the fact remains that death is not permanent unless you DELETE your character.

[Skirmisher]

Considering that death isn't permanent in GS, I don't see what the big deal is. :shrug:

Sad but true.

Death should be so much more of a large impacting event or SIMU just encourages people to lose any sense of having to deal with the consequences of ones actions.

[Rathain]

No matter how dramatic you make the rez, the fact remains that death is not permanent unless you DELETE your character.

The difference here, is that you are referring to a game mechanic and RP in the same line, and I am referring strictly to RP. Death is not final among player characters. Hwever, it does not mean one should not RP the gravity of such occurences. Raising the dead has become a diluted function of RP, because of the slight attitude that many clerics take in raising. Dramatic rezzing isn't a requisite for RPing the event, and in fact just amounts to more screenscroll. However, the event is physically and mentally atrophying, and that should be kept in mind should one choose to RP.

[Leetahkin]

Those two you killed were not the only ones commenting on your affairs. They were however, the two youngest characters who commented on your affairs.

If there were, they did not speak it aloud or to me. The one I killed has a bad reputation that I didn't even know about before he kept running his mouth. He threw on the net about me picking on someone younger (him). He was the one who kept throwing insults, and instigated the whole thing. As I told him, if he can't handle the consequences of his actions, he needed to shut up. He didn't, so I shut him up. :)

There were quite a few who came to Entress afterwards to let her know about his reputation. And there were some quite verbal over the net that he was an idiot and they would shut him up if he didn't stop.

Yeah, I'll probably have to pull the log and post it.

[Nilandia]

Certainly there are numerous descriptions of horrific violence for random reasons in the middle ages (both in paintings, engravings, writing, etc); the first that comes to my mind is Song of Roland, which is an incredibly bloody tale filled with death both Noble and not. Admittedly, this focuses on battles but a lot of the sentiment behind the killings could have easily taken place off the battlefield. One thing that's missing from Gemstone, though, is all the weeping and fainting.

Okay, Song of Roland is a bad example, since it's from the dark ages rather than the middle ages, but in truth the versions most people know were written in the middle ages, and thus have more the flavor of the middle ages. Really I just wanted to mention the fainting, weeping, and dying of grief. What wussy men, those Frankish warriors were.

Going back further we have stories like Beowulf, Song of Aneurin, the Norse eddas, the Mabinogion, ad infinitum back into history both real and fictional.
I've read the Song of Roland and Beowulf myself so I can only comment on those in particular.

Bear in mind that the Song of Roland and Beowulf are works of fiction and prone to exaggeration and other elements that are not possible or credible.

The Song of Roland, for an example, includes frequent descriptions of people cutting men and horses in half with one swing of the sword or people giving long speeches after taking a mortal wound. Beowulf includes a number of monsters that (obviously) don't exist.

Thus, their descriptions of the frequency of death and murder can be called into question as being genuine.

One can also point to other works of the time, such as the Battle of Maldon, that reinforce the opposite point. In the Battle of Maldon, Brithnoth has an obvious advantage of the Vikings on such bad terrain (on an island connected to the mainland by a spit of land) that if he wanted, he could have his men absolutely slaughter the Vikings. Brithnoth, however, allowed the Vikings to cross in safety to ensure a fairer fight, an act that would eventually lead to his death.

You can also look to works such as the Táin Bó Cúalinge and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight to take the extreme of your point in a work that doesn't have nearly as much semblance of truth. The Táin has Queen Mebh going to war against Daire, a chieftain of Ulster, simply to take possession of a bull, not to mention the whole of the men of Ulster afflicted by a curse that leaves them unable to fight except for the 17-year-old Cuchulainn, who holds off Mebh's army single-handedly.

In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the Green Knight, Bertilak, asks the knights of Camelot to strike him with his own axe on the condition that the knight will accept a blow from him in return. Gawain eventually beheads Bertilak, who then picks up his head and walks out. Talk about death not meaning anything!

Anyway, you could say that the point of my rambling is that the information provided by fictional accounts is far too easily called into question to be used reliably.

To take it to an extreme, and not completely fitting, analogy, if you look at the sum of our current media, our society would appear to be significantly more violent than it is. People tend to be interested stories that depart from real life, and it's not much of a stretch to imagine that people living in the Middle Ages wouldn't be much different.

By the by, the term "dark ages" came from the Renaissance to refer to the time after the fall of the Roman Empire and before the rebirth of Greco-Roman ideals taking place during the Renaissance, during which the people lived in the "darkness," deprived of the "light" of Greco-Roman culture. Current historians call the same time period the Middle Ages.


I think the difficult part here is trying to reconcile what we consider insults in Gemstone with what were actually considered insults in the middle ages (and earlier). My facetious post about a cobbler attacking may not be that far fetched -- think of a peasant who spurns a blacksmith's work. Might that blacksmith take his hammer to the peasants head?
Possibility of loss of livelihood, execution and/or torture. Moral belief against killing people. Other methods of recompense.

Currently in GS, the only real way for people to get back at each other is to kill them. Real life had many other avenues.


Certainly anyone of higher-born status treated peasants and serfs with indifference, akin to a master/slave relationship.
Reading this has reminded me of something else of life during this time period. While the higher classes could certainly look upon the peasants and serfs as below them, they also could not afford to eliminate them.

One of the cornerstones of the feudalism of the time was that, in theory, the nobles protected their serfs and vassals, while the serfs and vassals served in the noble's army. So while every now and then, a noble could kill a serf or peasant that served him, killing your serfs repeatedly would make you unpopular with your own people, deplete your fighting force and thus make your lands quite tempting to neighboring nobles who could swoop in and take your lands.


One name: Vlad Tepes. He killed masses of peasants, nobles and even monks for the most trivial reasons, or so we are told. Was he unique in his time? Absolutely not. There are tales of the Turks from the same period of equally astonishing brutality.
Not to excuse Vlad's actions completely, but you must understand that Vlad's situation was exceptionally unstable.

The monarchy was an elective, where the nobility chose their ruler from those who were descended from a specific line, so the nobility held exceptional political power and the monarchy was, in a way, indebted to the nobles. At the same time, Wallachia was somewhat of the battleground between Hungary and the Ottoman Empire.

Add to that a personal vendetta spawned by the death of Vlad's father, who was said to have been killed by the same Wallachian nobles still in power, another faction of the line that disputed Vlad's rule, Vlad being removed from power twice and an intense hatred of the Ottomans due to Vlad having been a "hostage" in the Ottoman Empire where he was introduced to torture through first-hand experience.

Even without an underlying mental illness that most seem to agree was there, Vlad had to be brutal to survive. And this is even assuming that all accounts of Vlad's actions were true, though there is more than enough evidence to suspect that some were more politically motivated than a factual account of events.

However, pointing to single individuals to prove a point is a risky game at best. It's easy to find people who are outside the norm to prove your claim, but it doesn't make it correct. One might well point to Vlad Tepes and Elizabeth Báthory, a Hungarian countess who allegedly had 650 girls and young women killed because she believed their blood kept her young, and say that all rulers of the time were equally brutal.

The extremes, however, do not prove a rule. At the same time, the Renaissance was taking hold in other areas of Europe, and the need for killing people to the extent of Vlad Tepes significantly waned.


In addition to ol' Vlad, I'll give you a quick example off the top of my head, relative to slavery in the US, circa the Civil War. Dr. Mudd, possible accomplice to John Wilkes Booth, was reported to have routinely beaten and whipped his slaves for very minor infractions. This from a man who quoted his Hippocratic Oath as the reason why he aided Booth in his flight. Do you think going back further in time would make people more civilized, their violence less pronounced?
Again, my point stands, that extremes do not prove a rule. In the extremes of human behavior, we have people today or in recent history who drill holes in other peoples' skulls to pour acid in, hoping to make zombies, or who capture women to make them sex slaves before killing them when they've outlasted their usefulness, or who goes to an Engineering School in Montreal and starts killing women, claiming he's against feminism.

There are a lot of seriously messed up people in the world, but they're far from normal. The same can be said for the examples given.


Humanity can, did and will absorb a lot of death.
Agreed, but how often did people die and for what causes?

Gretchen

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

:yeahthat:


Also, :rofl: at the responses to my own statement... that was what the GM told me so I guess it's ok for your cobbler to kill someone who tells him a shrubbery could cobble a better shoe!

[CrystalTears]

GS is loosely based on medieval times.. and people thought NOTHING back then of killing over an insult. Especially if the person who was insulted was highborn or a knight, or even just thought of themselves highly.
The above historical lessons are all your fault, you realize! :tongue:

[Artha]

I think the clash of ideas here involves people who get their knowledge from fantasy books (DragonLance, Song of Ice and Fire, etc) vs people who think about what makes a society work (hint: Not killing people willy-nilly).

[Jolena]

An interesting point has been brought up by Rethain in regards to RP and the lack of significance that death plays in the world of Elanthia. Unfortunately, the mechanics do support the ability for someone to consider death as inconsequential and take it very lightly. I for one, having played a character who enjoys testing her skills against creatures that are much more difficult than she should be able to deal with (for personal reasons that relate to her RP), have dealt with death more flippantly than I probably should have. Not only that, but during the saga of the Griffon Sword, there were 3 long years of regular invasions, sieges, and gloom/doom in a great deal of the cities that the majority of the population resides in. Those invasions and sieges lead to a lot of deaths for the characters having to deal with those things (and I might point out that if they simply walked around it as if it didn't exist, the same argument of lack of viable RP would be used against them for not allowing events in their city to affect and shape their character), and so the flippancy of death mechanics was not so much questioned during that time. But should it have been?

I realize that as I have grown as a RP'er and my character has become more fleshed out and dynamic, death for her is something that I definitely take more seriously but it took years to get to that point. I do however, have a friend who RP's with us quite a bit and she has gone so far to make death meaningful for her character as to RP out that she received a dream/vision of 10 gifts being given to her. Each time a death occurrs to her character, no matter the reason that it occurrs, she consequently sees one of those 'gifts' being opened and vanishing. I'm sure you can guess that when the 10th and final gift is opened, she will be deleting her character, as that is all the 'favors' she was granted in her lifetime. While it is unusual, I applaud her efforts in doing such a thing, and trust me when I say that each of the times her character has died has been a very stressful and serious thing for her as a player, as she adores her character and does not want to lose her. Though, on the same tangent, it also makes her very concientious of how she conducts herself, where she hunts, and what she gets involved in, so that the deaths don't occurr at all if she can help it.

Perhaps another thing that might discourage flippancy towards death would be if, as someone else suggested (I believe Rethain), clerics and paladins were more paticular about whom they raise, what the reasons are for raising them, and how often they raise someone. There will always be the cleric who's dedicated their life to serving humanity, so to speak, and their deity encourages the rampant gift of life to whomever needs it at the time without any real requirements beforehand. It would be much more interesting, however, to see more often than not that a cleric will be unwilling or unable to raise someone if they do not fall into line with the particulars of that cleric's chosen deity, or their own personal morals/values. That to me, would make much more sense, than just running in and raising any dead body that is in need.

Of course, this also leads to the question of whether or not someone would be willing to give up the experience they can garner by raising said person, and in most cases I believe that the experience will win over personal RP and dynamic characters.

[Landrion]

I think the clash of ideas here involves people who get their knowledge from fantasy books (DragonLance, Song of Ice and Fire, etc) vs people who think about what makes a society work (hint: Not killing people willy-nilly).

Id prefer my fantasy game to be more like Dragonlance and Song of Fire and Ice than a real life society. I live now in a nice working real life society. I come to Gem for the wild fantasy life.

[Artha]

Jolena's Discussion of the GSS
An interesting thing to think about here is how people dealt with the GSS baddies. By killing them. So obviously, death has some meaning, because there are quite a few Lornon-alligned clerics who'd be more than willing to rezz those guys.

[Leetahkin]

With what Jolena said, there was a healer that came to the area that I killed the two people at last night. He refused to heal them. He was a bit smart though in asking if they wanted a heal and a drag, with no intention of doing so. Heh.

But I applaud him at least for not healing them just for the experience. He very well could have even though he was annoyed at them and didn't agree with what they were doing.


I have had my healer heal someone before who wasn't seen by other townspeople in a good light. She chose not to get involved with the situation though, so didn't find herself a bad person for healing them. She merely chose to be neutral.

I'm going to have grow with her more, however, to see if she will always choose a neutral stance and heal whoever, as that's what she's there for - to help people who are hurt. Or if she will start to steer more towards her own personal values, and that of her deity. I've got some reading up to do with her yet.

[Jolena]

An interesting thing to think about here is how people dealt with the GSS baddies. By killing them. So obviously, death has some meaning, because there are quite a few Lornon-alligned clerics who'd be more than willing to rezz those guys.

I agree with this, actually. I have seen more often than not, that the Lornon-alligned characters stick more to their RP and their character's personal choices and values over experience than those who are supposedly devout Liabo-alligned characters. I can't count how often I saw a Liabo-alligned cleric raise a person who is very obviously devoted to a Lornon Arkati, and the cleric thought nothing of it. Same thing with empaths. Now, I realize that empaths are more inclined to say 'I help anyone who's hurt, I just hate all the pain' but at some point, I would expect them to think to themselves "Why is this person injured? I know they are devoted to a darker way of life, so is it possible that they were doing something horrible and got injured in the process? Do I really want to help this person continue to live so that they may do more of these things I am against?" Obviously this is an example and most people will not go to these depths with their empath or cleric, but it would definitely make for more interesting consequences and reactions if they did.

[Artha]

I wrote a guide some time ago about proper Empath RP.

[Nilandia]

I agree with this, actually. I have seen more often than not, that the Lornon-alligned characters stick more to their RP and their character's personal choices and values over experience than those who are supposedly devout Liabo-alligned characters. I can't count how often I saw a Liabo-alligned cleric raise a person who is very obviously devoted to a Lornon Arkati, and the cleric thought nothing of it. Same thing with empaths. Now, I realize that empaths are more inclined to say 'I help anyone who's hurt, I just hate all the pain' but at some point, I would expect them to think to themselves "Why is this person injured? I know they are devoted to a darker way of life, so is it possible that they were doing something horrible and got injured in the process? Do I really want to help this person continue to live so that they may do more of these things I am against?" Obviously this is an example and most people will not go to these depths with their empath or cleric, but it would definitely make for more interesting consequences and reactions if they did.
I took a similar stance with Nilandia during the GSS when it was in Solhaven for the second time. She would seek out the DA people who had died and would allow her to help. She wasn't looking for the practice, as she could have easily found it sitting in North Market, but rather she was looking to build a relationship with the Lornonites. She hoped, rather naively, that if she could form a friendship, she could either talk to them to find out their motives and hopefully sway them from their path, or learn their plans and work to ruin them.

Of course, it never came to anything, but it definitely was interesting to see the flak she caught from the Haveners.

Gretchen

[Andreal]

Each character is considered a hero to the general NPC populace, which make up the towns and you don't see unless you RP and pretend to. Pretend that the GS world has millions of people, who do not get raised when they die and can't easily face even a giant rat.

How many sylvans do you see while playing the game? Lots right? According to the documentation, there are few that left the trees. Take that into perspective when you consider the scale that the creaters of the game are trying to make the evironment, its huge. Even when you go to TSC and there is two people there, the room description shows itas a bustling area.

[DCSL]

I've read the Song of Roland and Beowulf myself so I can only comment on those in particular.

Bear in mind that the Song of Roland and Beowulf are works of fiction and prone to exaggeration and other elements that are not possible or credible.

The Song of Roland, for an example, includes frequent descriptions of people cutting men and horses in half with one swing of the sword or people giving long speeches after taking a mortal wound. Beowulf includes a number of monsters that (obviously) don't exist.

Thus, their descriptions of the frequency of death and murder can be called into question as being genuine.


Yes, but all of that is true of GS. GemStone is an exaggeration far beyond our real life and we have a number of monsters that obviously don't exist. We also have magic.

Real life comparisons and attempts to get GS to fit into those comparisons are sketchy at best. At least, I think so. Whatever the intentions of those who supposedly based GS on the Middle Ages, they are simply not the same now nor will they ever be. We have too many life-altering facets in GS that are never encountered in real life.

The relative ease with which death is thwarted ensures that death means less than it does here, so logically, it could be feasible for it to be a legitimate punishment for mere insult. At least, for our hardbitten, violent adventurers, who seem to lead lives soaked with the blood of sentient beings (orcs, trolls, trali, shan, ithzir, even humans when the Jantalars were huntable). Generally speaking, of course. I realize there are a few pacifists out there.

Lysistrata, for instance, does all that she can to avoid death but it happens. Heck, some of her best "friends" have killed her in the past. She doesn't exactly take it in stride or anything, but she certainly doesn't react in the same way I would to impending death. There are just too many factors that are utterly alien to any way of life we've ever experienced in any time period on real life Earth.

[thornhappy]

Each character is considered a hero to the general NPC populace, which make up the towns and you don't see unless you RP and pretend to. Pretend that the GS world has millions of people, who do not get raised when they die and can't easily face even a giant rat.

How many sylvans do you see while playing the game? Lots right? According to the documentation, there are few that left the trees. Take that into perspective when you consider the scale that the creaters of the game are trying to make the evironment, its huge. Even when you go to TSC and there is two people there, the room description shows itas a bustling area.

People forget this. A lot. It's difficult to remember at times. Like you said, a deed is a big deal. Most commoners can't afford them.. etc. I could go on and on with this topic.

[Nilandia]

Yes, but all of that is true of GS. GemStone is an exaggeration far beyond our real life and we have a number of monsters that obviously don't exist. We also have magic.

Correct, but I was referring to the perception of death in the Middle Ages. I was not talking about such a perception in game. Someone commented that people in the Middle Ages never thought much about killing someone, and I questioned that assumption.

Gretchen

[RageOfMage]

Id prefer my fantasy game to be more like Dragonlance and Song of Fire and Ice than a real life society. I live now in a nice working real life society. I come to Gem for the wild fantasy life.

Certainly many share your opinion. However, please consider this.

Fantasy is full of the improbable and impossible. Dragons soars the skies, wizards channel ethereal powers, elves live for thousands of years. These are just some of the norms of typical fantasy-adventure life.

Still, the less a fantasy realm shares with "real life society," the more it becomes a childish Never-Never Land instead of an unlikely but imaginable Middle Earth. The aforementioned dragons, wizards, and elves are enough to distinguish fantasy from the "real" world. Is it not necessary to populate the fantasy realm with human beings who do not act with human emotion and motive.

The setting is fantasy. The events are fantastic. The characters (people) living among them them should not be. Otherwise they become nothing more than heroes in the Marvel Universe.

[Elementz]

By the way (I was waiting for the ranting to be over),

He/she had begun the entire ordeal of being OOC, by using OOC terms such as n00b. I think that negates any of the irrational attacks I've had against me, regarding OOC behavior. Secondly, she was stalking me EVEN AFTER I warned her and she warned back, which is why it became another issue altogether.

Also, some of you posters have way too much time to sit here and philosophize about a situation you weren't involved with. Especially, when you've only recieved bits and pieces of information to base your rants about.

-Peace

[Stunseed]

Holy bumpage, Batman!

[DevonG]

I'm gonna add to this even though this thread is old.

Maselon said by far something I wish Simu would fucking look at - realize - and FIX.

That is..

>Ive always hated reporting. GMs and GHs do next to nothing. And if they do by some miracle do something... You wont ever know it. As they have that stupid policy about not telling what/how they do things.

And to do the warn interact thing... is absurd. Not being able to talk to friends about them, or be in the same room etc.. You basically have to re-think your whole fucking game play, just because some lame ass idiot isnt being taken care of properly.


Of anything that's of annoyance this is probably my biggest with Gemstone. All GH's, GM's decisions are always biased on how they feel things should be done.

If they would just stick to a fuckin uniform code and acknowledge that if someone talks shit to your character - you should have every motha fuckin right to whoop that ass. If you don't - they've simply forced you to roleplay a coward (or a chicken).

And like mase also said if they do-do anything they won't tell you becuz its "Policy". Probably the only one i've seen them follow consistently.

Very good point Mase - Glad to see your not just a merchant and you've been down that road. :P

[Warriorbird]

Policy goes above warn interacts. People are stupid...just ignore them. If they get physical, policy is on your side.

[Sylvan Dreams]

By the way (I was waiting for the ranting to be over),

He/she had begun the entire ordeal of being OOC, by using OOC terms such as n00b. I think that negates any of the irrational attacks I've had against me, regarding OOC behavior. Secondly, she was stalking me EVEN AFTER I warned her and she warned back, which is why it became another issue altogether.

Also, some of you posters have way too much time to sit here and philosophize about a situation you weren't involved with. Especially, when you've only recieved bits and pieces of information to base your rants about.

-Peace

Somehow I think you waited a tad bit too long.

[g++]

after reading some of this my main question is why did you assist in the first place? If you wanna grief someone prepare for them to grief you back. Calling a gamehost after you ambush and murder someone and then being like "I cant believe there on his side" is kind of retarded. I have no love for elementz but jesus christ get real

[Elementz]

Aww you know you love me

[FinisWolf]

After a year I would hope the "ranting" would be over.

Why even bother?

Finis

[Skeeter]

Starved for attention?