Metaplay - A Retrospective

[squakhawk 14038]

hi meows!!! :3c

 

I want to give an update on some rule changes we are making to the Metaplay rules (Roleplay Leadership Guidelines), as well as some thoughts on their implementation thusfar. If you wish to skip the yapping and go directly to the changes, see the text highlighted and underlined in yellow for what is changing precisely.

Metaplay: A Retrospective Look

Metaplay has been online for roughly eight months now, which nearly thirty bans having occurred in total throughout it's duration. The ruleset has without doubt had some successes and some failures, but I believe this is natural in a process of growth and development - and something that has caused change within both the administration and player culture.

An issue with the rules commonly stated is that there is lack of clarity on specific actions that constitute metaplay. With any social situation, there is nuance - and of course, with a rule that is inherently on social situations in particular, it too must be nuanced. With that, strictly put, there cannot nor will there ever be exact actions (beyond what is already exactly defined) defined in metaplay rules. However, what we can clarify, is that metaplay rules are strictly degrading and degenerate to roleplay. Fundamentally, metaplay actions are tools in which to push an OOC or hostile narrative that functions entirely as a marker of fifth-grade interpersonal squabbles rather than to generate a story or narrative. With this, the following changes should hopefully clarify further the nuance that metaplay is strictly a method to abuse roleplay as a vector to settle petty social disputes over a block game rather than to prevent you telling stories and sharing them with your friends. This Post by Toffee is an excellent example that breaks down interactions and metaplay vs normal intent. Our game is one that is one that is social, and shared - and that is the way we intend to keep it.

With the bans that have gone out, there's only one player we admittedly made a mistake in banning- and though he was unbanned a couple of days later, it's a reminder that we are not flawless in our investigation, and that player reporting is not something that is entirely foolproof either. On the other hand, the Vinovia report banned twenty people from the server - a number unheard of in a banwave that even I was anxious in executing. But truthfully, if these metaplay rules are to be taken seriously, and we do intend to enact them and cause a shift in player culture, it is something we will always, no matter the cost, uphold. With each and every report we have and will continue to review diligently and punish where necessary when these rules are broken. It's something I uphold with sincerity, and believe that to improve as a server and individual writers and actors, we need to keep these rules in entirety.

Something that Toffee's post mentions is Vagueness - and the intention of it to prevent loopholing and rule lawyering. Explicitly, the rules are written to be broad and general for this purpose. However, there is one thing I agree with Toffee on to an extent - that banned players need more clarification on what they are precisely banned for. On one hand, I look to the Vinovia bans and the bans of Tide1 and Mickaelhz. Initially, these players protested their bans - even took to the forums on how there was no reasoning for it. Later in their appeals, each and every one of them were able to list the precise reasoning for their bans. I don't believe these players were just lying and hoping to intimidate the administration with public pressure on their ban, but that they truthfully may not have known what they did wrong. I think that if you are so deep into something, and that others are doing it, it might seem like the right thing - and it takes time and removal of exposure from that thing to get yourself out of that mentality. And truthfully, that occurred, and we haven't had a metaplay banned player be banned twice for it so far. On another hand, there's the pessimistic side of me (and im sure many forum philosophers) that state they will just hide their actions better next time. Maybe, but a hypothetical is a hypothetical - and until I really see it (and I haven't), I'm uncertain it's happened thusfar. We keep pretty close eyes on these players, and I believe they know that, and it risks far more to organize and orchestrate plots OOCly than to simply log on and roleplay them appropriately. With all that said, I'd like to personally make sure we do better on telling people the reasons for their ban (Albeit, during the Vinovia bans, we did - and many simply did not believe them unless they were shown logs, which will never happen). And in the future, I'd like to maybe work more with players on improving their conduct rather than just shutting the door on them. Bans are meant to be both punitive and reformative. I'd like the server to change with more of the latter, than the prior, as punishment is really just a deterrent and stopgap for better change.

Ultimately, as with any change, it spawns from each and every player - and we encourage you continue to report any and every instance of metaplay you may see. There is no action without knowing what to act upon. While there has been the thought of proactive action, I don't believe random stop-searches and shakedowns of players discords and logs is going to yield either friendly conduct, or healthy behavior, within the community. It's fishing - not solving the problem. Should of course you have any systematic suggestions on how to prevent metaplay from being an option or shortcut in a ruleset or in roleplay, please as always let us know!

Metaplay. The play-beyond-play. Manipulating, coercing, pressuring or ostracizing players to influence in-character outcomes. Out-of-character, backdoor driven narratives, events, or outcomes; fabricated or canned roleplay that serves an OOC motivation. IC activity that opposes the creative and spontaneous spirit of roleplay.

• Metaplay is the degeneration of roleplay. It may occur with or without metagaming & powergaming—but it does not include the facilitating or gathering of RP. It is an intentional subversion of rules and roleplay to serve an OOC motive through malicious act(s).
• Some examples and further explanation are available [on this post].

 

Who is a Roleplay Leader?

• If your character governs, leads, or mentors others you are a Roleplay Leader! This may be as the head of a nation, a member of it’s council, or the head of a household—a roleplay leader has some level of authority over others. And, to the degree of people influenced by this authority, that much responsibility you must also wield.

 

What rules/behavior are expected of a Roleplay Leader? Here is what is outlined in our new Roleplay Leadership Guidelines - designed to endorse the cooperative narrative we're trying to work towards.

1. Protect the continuity and purity of roleplay; cherish and nurture the whimsical, spontaneous nature of roleplay.
2. Do not conduct, or aid in conducting, metaplay.
3. Discourage and report metaplay to Moderation.
   1. Knowing about and waiting for a convenient time—or knowing and choosing not to report, also violates this guideline.

 

https://www.lordofthecraft.net/roleplay-leadership/

 

I'm looking forward to continuing with these rules and continuing to try and better the community to what we can and should be - to make sure organic roleplay is upheld first and foremost. The enjoyment and fulfillment of our players comes first and foremost. Now, and forever always.

 

See you around,

Squak

[Kaiser 2347]

@Werew0lfWE COMING FOR YOU

 

 

[Werew0lf 24180]

2 minutes ago, Kaiser said:

@Werew0lfWE COMING FOR YOU

 

 

 

heh, no u arent. 

[Crunchiest_Leaf 1242]

[Wyrvun 1808]

Does this mean Ryan will finally get a response to his ban appeal?

[Crevel 7557]

With the clamping down on malicious metaplay, can Administration perhaps also look into giving harsher treatment to those who play on the server with characters to fulfil sexual fantasies? Pretty please. Any player that is playing on LotC with a character that has been used off-platform in an NSFW manner or is concurrently being used on the server for SFW RP and off to do NSFW roleplay should be given the same treatment as on-platform ERPers. Thank you.

[squakhawk 14038]

3 minutes ago, Wyrvun said:

Does this mean Ryan will finally get a response to his ban appeal?

 

CGV'd, not metaplay banned 

[Jihnyny 5233]

erm okay. unban wud? thank you. 🫡

[Kaiser 2347]

4 minutes ago, Wyrvun said:

Does this mean Ryan will finally get a response to his ban appeal?

 

Yes

 

No

[FlemishSupremacy 6115]

Can we get some clarification on when metaplay is grounds for voiding roleplay?

In the case of the Celia'nor handover to itemvendor, the rp was voided, which was probably the right call.
However, in the Vinovia case, an entire group was wiped out by bans because the group's creation and actions were done through metaplay, but the RP was not voided, and thus used to kick off a large war.
A good standard for when RP is voided or not would probably be good. 

[xo31 3979]

4 minutes ago, FlemishSupremacy said:

However, in the Vinovia case, an entire group was wiped out by bans because the group's creation and actions were done through metaplay, but the RP was not voided, and thus used to kick off a large war.

Depends on if it would benefit numendil or not. Hope this helps

[indiana105 5126]

[Junoix 2301]

Ok meow, yes meow 

[JustMeMorgan 2065]

Potentially a controversial take, but I never viewed the implementation of rules against metaplay to be inherently negative or a poor decision by staff. In my opinion I feel that metaplay has been a longstanding activity that had a really negative impact on LotC, and impacted its fundamental principles that the character and the person playing that character are two entirely different entities, and the over-involved interaction between them ruins a truly enjoyable narrative. I feel that it is something one may see in DnD or other games, where someone takes so much involvement in the story, like putting on Godmode in Skyrim, resurrecting characters they liked in Oblivion, savescumming in rimworld where these interventions really impact the actual ongoings that the person simply feels unequipped to feel.

 

My one suggestion to the staff team would be the clarity and openness to forgive metaplay and interactions of it, to have the decency to say "What you're doing isn't really in your best interests, and it seems as if it is actually preventing you from truly enjoying the server and what it's actual role is there for", forcing narratives and forcing certain events to take course to me seems like the attempt to control something that someone may not have control of elsewhere, and simply letting go of that need to take control may actually aid you enjoy the server in the long run.

 

p.s. I'm 1500 words into an essay and several bevvies in writing this, but please at least consider the message I'm tryna convey.

[Cheese 8880]

36 minutes ago, xo31 said:

Depends on if it would benefit numendil or not. Hope this helps

Petition to implement staff recusal rules because too many times moderation/admin have been blatantly biased and every time it caused near irreparable damage