frill

where would you say you stand politically

"Let these schismatics be bee-like and die off after their only sting. It is a time where the faith needs to return to being about the faith." Rev. Armas hums in fire-side tedium at the growing political tumult, taking a cheese-knife to his morning fill to encourage it to relieve some crumbs onto the bread placed aside it. "If you seek the merits of a man, pontiff or otherwise, it is very unwise to ask it from his enemies, but not much more foolish to ask them from himself." He continues, thumbing a husk from the bread between his mouth before swilling it with some sweetened red wine.

Grow up buddy, your theatre of shifting the blame of poor writing onto the players is not upsetting me. You need to clarify the rules on the main rules post instead of expecting players to delve through pages of explanatory comments when a war does arise. You can't expect to be there at every juncture explaining away inconsistencies if these rules are meant to last. Please, like I asked, put your clarifications in the main rules post. Edit because I'm going to stop replying to you; the intent of what you wrote and what people read from what was written are going to be very different. There is no blame in giving the wording a second or third pass for sake of clarification of meaning. But the comments of an announcement thread are not the place for these revelations. Playing Siege now bye

Spend less time arguing about what the rules should mean and clarify them in the main post. If you're devoting time to writing an explanatory Tolstoy novel blogpost because people are "misinterpreting" what was written, you've shat the bed on writing rules that can easily be understood and followed. Fix that in the main posts.

you can tell which playerbase steered the writing of this

it's like you don't want me to erp at all

he listened......

i hear they just added iron armor to minecraft

I am telesto with long live the queen ornament (with catalyst)

If it is any consolation I've had drinks with a few lotcers irl and I'm still ali

the holy bboon chills me when I think of it and maddens me when I dream of it

*crosses your palm with silver* tell me priceflash

ask me what kind of threads should stop being made

delightful !

do they got forked tongues

@Junar wwho built this

I encourage this brief switching-up of the helm and hope it’s a pivot towards a stronger and more cohesive team. There is a good future ahead, but it is now time to take the first few steps to getting to it.

please factor in replayability if there are like 2 dungeons. puzzles et al would be very slog boring encounters if you’ve already done them before so know the answers.

now you're the noblewoman ggt. Tables have turned

This is an outdated and frankly worrying opinion of banditry for a moderator to hold. I can’t name any “muh bandit” roleplayer who isn’t heavily invested in a national or racial community, nor any bandit that uses a throwaway character to do such. I worry for people who actively look to create roleplay conflict on the server if the attitude of the moderators is that they’re “rotten” and damaging the server. Maybe it would be healthier for the players of the server for you to reflect on where your attitudes towards banditry stem from, instead of being a dedicant to the outmoded idea of murderhobo banditry. Going to “ain’t this you?” your reply by throwing out an example where you tried to get players that your own nation was at war with to leave your nation tile when no villainy was occurring because their existence was “baiting raiding”. It is an example of your use of your elevated position as moderator to try to remove any potential source of conflict towards your home nation. Your prejudices toward people who favour conflict or bandit orientated roleplay might come from a place of preservation or respect for your full-time job of running a 250x250 Minecraft nation, but it is a hostile and dangerous opinion to publish and should be used as evidence to refuse your judgement should players receive you as a moderator during conflict RP. I would not expect bandit roleplayers to receive fair nor equal treatment from a moderator who, unprompted, calls them damaging to the server. Yes, punish those who take the conflict too far and break the rules, but publishing sweeping generalisations from a point of authority only leads to the current state of uncooperate out-of-character loathing continuing. Don’t try to minority report pre-emptively punish people by titrating banditry into a non-event by constantly tightening the rules.It would be better and healthier for the server for you to acknowledge and redress the problems in your position as moderator instead of blogposting to stoke the flames of mutual dislike that are leading to the current state of server conflict. Saying “bandits BAD 😞 settlements GOOD 🙂” is an empty aphorism that does nothing but continue to separate two playerbases that should be working cohesively to generate entertaining, engaging and enjoyable roleplay. Maybe if this attitude changes in some distant future the state of banditry on the server can be repaired, but the lingering prejudices of the staff-team against some phantom “ever-bandit” do nothing to resolve it.

Your argument falls apart when you start leaning on examples that are multiple years old. If anything, this bolsters the argument of a general stagnation of apolitical villainy roleplay — that is, banditry without a greater political purpose — due to the fact that you’ve had to paw back through multiple major conflicts to find an example of muh mean goons. I understand the blue-sky thinking about this point, especially as it’s a sentiment that Telanir has tried to encourage. However, this level of foregoing in-character tensions to develop greater story arcs has not worked so far. You may be able to beat your chest and point at examples such as bandits agreeing to egregious 5 versus 20 nation-raids, victorious or otherwise, but to posit that as anything but the fruit of players trying to find any conflict in the current villainy drought pointedly confusing. The mutual agreement between nations and parties does not work. The most glaring case-in-point is that warring nations agree on raid rules etc. to allow players to have a differing regulation of raids during wartime. Parties refuse to agree to any differing terms from the banditry default as there is no benefit to increasing or modifying the cap. Organising it beforehand with a wink and a nudge is not a tenable means of villainy on a server where players see threats to their roleplay nations as direct attacks on themselves as out-of-character individuals. The Rubern-Oren war ran from November to April (I may be wrong, but around then) and had no agreed war-time raid rules, so the peace-time banditry terms were used. The Sutica-Oren war ran from June to August and had no agreed war-time raid rules, so the peace-time banditry terms were used. Outside of the 8-day Orc-Dorf war, the mutual-agreement principle of war raid rules hasn’t been touched since its initial inception. Players in roleplay conflict have little intention nor desire to mediate the extant conflict’s terms; they instead want to mediate its existence outright. This is 😞 and not 🙂 to server roleplay as something greater than individual actions, resulting in a server culture where bandits are castigated out-of-character for being sources of in-character conflict. God forbid stress. Consider why people attack you each time the cooldown is off and try to address this problem. Is there some inherent weakness with your city? Is there an in-character problem between these nominal bandits and your settlement? These are problems that can, and should, be addressed in character. The out-of-character fuelling of banditry should be punished if you can find something to qualify it as such, but there is no reason to not remove sources of potential in-character conflict. People bounced to Sutica when it was a weak nation and would rotate banditing within minutes of the cool-down coming off and tiring of this, Sutica has developed both a military and greater intranational political alliances that managed to outrally and cow the single largest nation of the server into surrendering from an offensive war. There are ways to fix these problems that are far more amicable to roleplay and community-building than banning the idea of non-consentual conflict. I’m not going to mock you by asking if you have “talked to the bandits ooc :-D” to reach a mutual agreement on how and when raids should occur, especially if they’re becoming such a consistent problem that they are disrupting server events and roleplay at the national level outside of the multiple-day cooldowns that these twenty minute incursions cause. If you feel like something is harassment or not justified in roleplay and you can’t handle it yourself, call a moderator. If you feel like your nation can’t defend itself in-roleplay, hire sell-swords and provide some greater roleplay to players looking for conflict RP that wouldn’t otherwise defend , nor otherwise engage with, your community. Don’t castrate villainy when the problem is entirely your response to your situation and your own inability to shield yourself from frowny-face scenarios outside of seething until it’s removed from the server. I’m excited to be called “evil bandit >:(” for defending banditry, especially as my post history circles around 45% Oren law posts, having shadow-written countless others. I am by no means a road bandit, but that is not to say that I don’t enjoy bandit roleplay. The shared agreement backstage handshake-and-wink concept of “mutually assured banditry” cannot exist in a server where in-character hostilities are out-of-character affronts. 🤔🍹 booyakasha