Welcome to The Lord Of The Craft

We're currently the #1 Minecraft Roleplaying Server, fitted with custom plugins, a unique crafting system, custom character cards and an incredibly active and passionate community; We're serious about Roleplay and we're always eager for new faces!

 

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

blindmind

Old Fart
  • Content count

    443
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

342 Incredible

About blindmind

  • Rank
    The Ugly

Contact Methods

  • Minecraft Username
    01100101 01100100 01110010 01101111 01101110 01101111 01110011
  • Email
    [email protected]

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

7,169 profile views
  1. Take a breather, man. Anyway, I feel like you're dancing around very specific scenarios without mentioning them and associating my arguments with those scenarios. Ironically, I've taken part in a bunch of wars myself, solely on the side of Oren. I only play humans, and I've been in favor of PvP default since the beginning (though that is irrelevant). That said, I still disagree with this. This document, as it is written, doesn't actually offer anything we can work with. Everything else is pretty off-topic. Also, be careful about using the "this doesn't concern you" argument. For one, war is a global concern assuming I never even set foot on a battlefield. For two, the argument will be turned against you by all the people "[hiding] as much as they like." Its a double-standard, much like the majority of this thread. Regarding this, the post I'm quoting now has been seen countless times in the past, but with the word "militant" replaced with "magic" or "peaceful." By the sound of it, you're through the looking-glass now, Alice.
  2. You seem to undermine your first paragraph by referencing Napoleon. This would imply that the rules set out by the document are, in fact, subjective. What may have been wrong for everyone else was clearly right in the eyes of Napoleon. As for the second and third paragraphs, regarding a team of overseers, I was piggy-backing off of other comments you have made outside of the OP. I tend to read the thread as a whole before I post. None of this, however, changes the fact that what the OP shows is not actually any kind of system that would moderate wars in a minecraft server. The bureaucracy of the "black and white" system is a necessary evil. It would be in place for the benefit of those who enjoy war too much and those who don't appreciate it at all. From my own experience, I know that the server would not notice the waning activity of all the players upon which the server apparently hinges. I've seen this argument before and I think its kind of silly. Wars and military-focused roleplay, in its current form, were barely around when the server started rolling. If anything, it was a distant flash-in-the-pan seen in quiet guilds that nobody really bothered with. I would liken it to the flavor of the month that lasted a bit longer than a month. If all these people were to stop doing what they're doing, or leave entirely, their roleplay would be replaced by something else. Besides, wars should be rare and they should be important. Frequent wars betray their significance and undermine the entirety of roleplay behind them. Otherwise, war feels like a skirmish between two gangs looking for a scrap in the crappy part of the city. It just happens, you live with it, you forget, and worry more about your rent check. Life goes on as though your war never happened.
  3. As lofty as this reads, I fail to see the system behind it. I can see its value in roleplay to a limited extent. The reason I say this is because its definitions are entirely subjective, which has always been the greatest, immutable flaw of the server and its community. I see the idea would be to erect a world council which would enforce the ideals set by the document, but I cannot see that holding much sway over world politics unless some supernatural force exerts its will over the nations and their war machines. The most I can see this offering is a list by which to tabulate the innumerable slights between nations as one nation steam rolls another. A world council cannot succeed so long as power is not balanced and politics are so easily manipulated (the greatest and worst thing about them). Much like the actual UN, a world council serves as a courtesy that isn't always extended. Unless a force outside of mortals' control is able to moderate what happens, this would be at the mercy of very unstable roleplay. If we had an OOC team managing this, I would not have much faith in it. My concerns might be assuaged if the Devs were to oversee this and act on what they feel appropriate, as they tend to be far away enough to be indifferent and have the long-term in mind. In this case, I'd like to see a proper "black and white" system written out that objectively details what constitutes war, when its valid, how often it can be waged, its costs, the methods by which it can be declared, how it is determined that war has ended in victory or defeat, etc. What we have here are a nicely written set of terms, justifications, and foggy limitations. To put this simply, if I lead a nation, I would use this. If I managed a minecraft server filled with people separated by culture and disparate perspectives, I would not.
  4. I'm on the fence about this. I hate l-ooc, and I'd like to see it discouraged, but I don't want this to be an in-character thing. Plus, there's the off-chance that, by linking it to the RP world, you'll be providing a way to encourage this behavior. The logic here is that certain characters might purposely try to "bracket" which, by definition, necessitates l-ooc (frustrated teenagers do the opposite of what you tell them, after all). There's enough IC moderation as it is anyway, and it hasn't done much good. Even still, I don't want someone's rampant mouth to have power over my character. At the end of the day, I'd rather this be handled by moderators with greater harshness.
  5. I'm not speaking to raiders, I'm speaking to bad roleplay. Dynamic roleplay, as people love to bring up in these situations, does not take priority over making things go smoothly. I've played villains most of my time on the server and I've never had any of these complaints levied against me. No ban reports, not even a PM. My characters have ruined lives. Even still, I've made certain sacrifices in RP because the enjoyment and well being of the server is more important than how cool or accomplished my characters are. I have no issues with this, and neither should anyone else. In this respect, I do not fail to realize anything. In this case, I'm someone who knows how and when to be the bad guy using that post as an example to speak to people who don't. I have, since the beginning of the server, tried to tell people where they're going wrong, why they're making these decisions, an why they shouldn't. Using your character to justify everything is to hide behind it. Its an excuse. Dynamic roleplay, or roleplay as I like to call it, can be great so long as the players act with intelligence and comradery. However, what I tend to see in these kinds of threads are people looking for the easiest way not to. I seek to address that. === Edit: Also, to address the strawman of people taking the fight to you, read the following sentence from the post I made prior to the one you quoted: "If you're targeting someone (not reacting to someone), and that person is not going to enjoy what you have, says they won't, or says they aren't, screenshot the conversation and let them off." I'm not talking about people reciprocating or inviting a fight. That's an entirely different issue that I have my own opinions on.
  6. I can't give out anymore +1s so I'll just reply. I pretty much agree with everything here. When you play the bad guy here, its a bit of a job. You're an entertainer, a rival, and a low-grade dungeon master rolled into one. You're supposed to be the thing that gives other characters' lives meaning, and not the other way around. This is why a little bit of scripting never bothered me, though I believe its more applicable to opposing groups than individuals. That said, I would encourage this sort of thing for any villain legitimately trying to give something to the server. Not only does it help you take pressure off potential RP, it weeds out those who don't want you around. No doubt, when you find someone solid, the training wheels will come off at some point and you'll start surprising each other. Like I said, though, I think more people should employ this mentality between groups. Coordinate with another group and design situations together so that there's a healthy ***-for-tat. This works super well when the rival group is lead by a friend you trust. Both leaders turn into providers for their followers who can feast on their designs.
  7. They should sticky this post somewhere on the forums to inform new players on how not to play. Your argument essentially says, "if you don't want me here doing my thing, why don't you get better at stopping me?" That's pretty bad, dude. Also, your description of villains is off-base. It assumes that the players themselves aren't "dressing up" by logging on and playing their characters. Raiders have always been villains, especially considering how players tend to portray them. Besides, for most of the servers life, you actually needed a VA to raid, and I can't imagine the rules and guidelines for playing villains has changed much. When you're the bad guy getting over on somebody, you're there to be fun and complicate that character's life in a way his/her player would find substantial and interesting. This has always been the case, despite how often players do it wrong. To sum up, there's nothing different between you and the other people here who put on airs an play pretend.
  8. Refinement might be useful since its dancing around specifying situations, but axing it completely is silly. Refinement is necessary mostly to inform spiteful players and because invoking the rule may also break the rule. The only people I see complain about this, more often than not, are upset that they have an OOC obstacle between them and "winning." If these players are in such a position, they have no business choking other players with their brand of roleplay. They are either actually trying their best to win, using their characters as an engine of OOC harassment, providing subpar roleplay, or choosing the wrong targets and have too much pride to back off. The last bit is important; choosing the wrong targets. Hopefully, most players fall into this mistake instead of the others (though I have my own opinions). If you're targeting someone (not reacting to someone), and that person is not going to enjoy what you have, says they won't, or says they aren't, screenshot the conversation and let them off. Tell them to forget it happened. Then, find someone else who might be more fun without kicking up dust and sounding like a spoiled child who can't play with his toy. If the person you let off is abusing this rule, which has been a rule since the beginning for villains, you gather screenshots. Maybe we can have a method of putting in reports, secretly, on the forums for the sake of posting these screenshots to serve as a log. When the log get suspicious, a GM can review it and see if someone is getting harassed or is abusing the rule. I can see trolls trying their best to saturate this log, but maybe that can be used to place guilt on the troll instead of the person obsessively logged. Investigation would probably be necessary.
  9. I'm going to cherry-pick Temp's post to describe how I've regarded conflict on this server for a while.
  10. Neither do I believe that this community can handle this responsibility at this point in time, considering how silly players are before, during, and after war, nor do I believe we deserve it. Monks don't care about anyone's war. #monkmagic.
  11. This is assuming they're being enforced. Either we need more slapping, or we need to slap harder. We also need good examples, presented clearly and in our faces, if we're to let people know that there actually is a standard to uphold. This is something the Media Team could get on, in fact. They could make a video detailing solid, meaningful roleplay before a brawl. Or, a staff member can officially provide a list of screenshots depicting the same. I mean, damn, this could even grow into an official guide to confrontations, making special note that any confrontation has more options than bloodshed and murder. However, should the moment arise, here are a series of examples that you're expected to meet or exceed. Subpar roleplay can then be compared to this and dealt with accordingly.
  12. At what point did this magnitude of lazy RP become acceptable when predicating PvP? Sounds like people are getting away with a lot, when they should be getting slapped around.
  13. I'm glad we're on the same page, though its unfortunate that regulation would be a problem. I do understand the reasoning behind the raids, but what I believe we need are, simply put, better reasons. For a while, the justifications have been paper thin, hinging on "its what my character would do." I always thought the Undead did a decent job in the beginning, though there was considerable backlash at the time. I will admit, in this case, that I cannot say I know all the facts for sure. However, what I believe the Undead did was raid often, but in different spots over a period of time. They were usually short and eventful, only leading to destruction in the cases of small, unknown forts way off in the wilderness, or when they were ready to start marching toward Al'Khazar, the human capital at the time. There were complaints about scripting, as well, typically when a major town was destroyed, but the intrigue of it all seemed worth it. Concerning your last point, like I said, not enough people here have played D&D, man.
  14. I've said my piece about combat maybe a hundred times over so I'll refrain from writing the same words again. If I've ever made any impression here, it'd probably be about what I've discussed in the past. Raids are an interesting issue that could be discussed in detail. My belief is that player mentality is what's at fault, and its very likely that the current system enables that low-brow mentality. I'd rather try and fix the former, of course, but I'm kind of doubtful anyone will meet me half way on that. So, the raiding system. If the server is as saturated as you say, then I would propose that the breathing room you suggest should be much wider. Raids should be significant. They shouldn't be another day in the life. People may like raiding often, but their enjoyment doesn't make it appropriate or even quality roleplay. I say push the cooldown to once a week, or twice a month, to as infrequent as once a month. A raid as the forums call it is more along the lines of raping and pillaging. A place does not easily recover from something like that, especially when they can just up and happen as often as children play with toys. People need more structure than that if they care at all what kind of story they're telling. It is my belief, however, that people do not care at all what kind of story they're telling as long as they're the ones in the position to tell it. Bottom line is that we need more storytellers; people who appreciate conflict for what it is, its gravity, and pacing. When I'm at conventions talking in front of a crowd, I don't hunt down and lecture anyone who decides to leave. When we're in the position to provide RP as opposed to exploring it, the key word is "provide." You hand it out, as an offer to be taken and reciprocated, instead of shoving it down the throat of the nearest target before anyone can say so much as "hello." Also, not enough of these role players have played D&D. Rolling is fine. Any argument against it cites the illogical in any given scenario as a flaw, when, really, they're just not creative enough to make sense of any particular roll. Rolling is truly the essence of the Creator's grand design, to which we must all conform or choose to defy in utmost heresy against fate.
  15. I'm glad that the topic is shifting toward this discussion. Like I said before, RP or PvP default is not the issue. Its the people, their mentality, enabling poor behavior, and doing little to curb that behavior. There should probably be a separate thread for this just so people don't get confused, thinking that a decision between defaults will address the problem simply. Right now, we're talking about raids and how to restructure them. As much as I'd like to say that it might help, the people will still be bastards trying to look for ways to further their profession as bastards. What we need to be looking for is a way to clean these bastards up or cut them off entirely. We can put chicken wire up between two bitter sides, but it won't stop them from sneering and frothing at the mouth at each other. Plus, people tend to toss bottles just to gauge the integrity of said metaphorical chicken wire. I don't now how other people feel about this, but I believe we're in dire need of strict, harsh enforcement. So many of the players are like monkeys flinging their own feces at the walls just to see what sticks. They should be treated as such. To the people intelligently discussing this, what are your thoughts? I'd write more but I have a job interview in less than an hour.