Ryzom

Ackir, if you play that way the other characters will just see you as insane. Nothing wrong with that, as long as no feelings are hurt.

Raynes, I disagree. We can talk more about it on Saturday.

ackir wrote:I am saying that when a player labels their character as something (note: not me labelling them) and plays that way, there needs to be consistancy with the lore.

I disagree. When a player labels their character as something and plays it that way, there needs to be a consistancy with that character.

The lore is there as a nice and loose backdrop for our creativity to take and run story from, not set limits by.

So feasably, you could play a character like you described. Too much goo makes one pretty crazy. It might be really fun to even see that character interact, evolve into an anti hero following his beliefs, sudenly the scene would discover it has a "bad-guy" other than an opposing faction to deal with, maybe he recruits other goo heads to his psychosis or even uses the goo to torture and transform some victims into henchmen in his crusade to eliminate this homin threat to the kitins.

So long as all of his "victims" knew he was roleplaying and consented to roleplaying with him as victims/followers, it's all pretty good, and suddenly we have a story that is wild, crazy,...

and motivating for other roleplayers to react ic to.

While I understand that there is a human predisposition for trying to set definitions for any given thing, laying out set definitions beyond the general concepts a game's pre written lore has already granted everyone to pick from invites an unsavory set of ooc events. An event chain that someone else reffer'd to and is -ALWAYS- a precurser to an eventual death of the roleplay scene, known as the birth of "Role-play Police."

Here is what happens- /begin fictional re-enactment-

"Hey you, what are you roleplaying as?"
"Oh! I'm a Kami supporter. Wow, nice to meet more r/pers."
"Nuhuh! We had a conference and that said all Kami supporters are supposed to follow this -blahblahblah-. You aren't roleplaying a Kami supporter right!"
"Um, I read the website and based my character off of that, why can't I just play my character?"
"Because everyone agreed that kami supporters had to be this so we knew what they believed."
"But um, my character doesn't believe that and is still a Kami supporter"
"Nuhuh, he can't be, we made it so. You'd be cheating if you played it like that"
"Um, sure.. whatever, I'll just go.. play over here on another server/game where I can play my Kami supporter how I want."
"Cheater!...."

/end fictional re-enactment.

But you get my drift. And mind you that was a mild example of what i have physically witnessed happen to former roleplay scenes as they deteriorate into "r/p police" diatribes of who's following or breaking cannon's that people decided they "needed" in order to be able to roleplay in a fictional world.

now as for-

raynes wrote:In the real world if you come across a Catholic or a Southern Baptist, or a Jewish person you know are are certain things they beleive in that makes them a part of that group. We need to have certain set definitions in game. Right now if someone says they are a Karavan follower that doesn't mean anything becuase there is no clear idea what the Karavan represent. You could say the website and lore tell us that, but people in the game don't follow that.

It doesn't matter if the people in game don't follow that entirely, perfectly, or even well, so long as they stay true to thier character.
And as for the assumed belief systems of the mentioned religiouss groups in real life, no, you really don't know there are any specific things they believe in, unless you run your life by taking steriotypes at face value.

There is such an infinite range of what any given person might subscribe to or not in any given religion that you'd basically be type-casting half of humanity to assume that baptist A really does share the set belief structure of baptist B.

It's... a pretty shallow way to go about things when the possibilities of roleplay are endless when people have the freedom to decide what each group means on thier own.

And I appologize if I am coming off as somewhat harsh here. But I am speaking from a place of experience in longstanding roleplay scenes. I've made similar mistakes of setting, or rather allowing a "cannon" rule to be set, and watched as it got turned around in my face and slowly destroyed a roleplay community that I loved and adored.

I truely enjoy this game, and I would simply hate to watch the current roleplay community repeat mistakes that I witnessed destroying other realms. It is an issue I am passionate about, and have experience in.

If you waste all your energy to define IC cannons, rather than simply arranging OOC boundaries of respect, you will sign your own death warrent to positive roleplay.

I've thought about this some more and have come the the conclusion that if people want to rp where its ok to interpret everything as the see if, then who am I to argue. So from now on when someone says they are neutral, they aren't because I don't interpret that way. When someone says the Karavan aren't a strict religion, it won't matter because under my view they beleive the Karavan is a strict religion.

Sounds like a winning plan to me.

Raynes just because you interpret things one way doesn't mean that everyone else must do the same. You are welcome to your opinions, but don't try to take that right away from other people.

This goes for everyone else too.

Takashi
Ryzom GM
Windermeer Events Team

Takashi wrote:Raynes just because you interpret things one way doesn't mean that everyone else must do the same. You are welcome to your opinions, but don't try to take that right away from other people.

This goes for everyone else too.

Takashi
Ryzom GM
Windermeer Events Team

Lets put this in a frame of reference that would effect you. As it is you have the Kitin as enemies. They are out to kill homins. From now on everyone has thier own interpretation of the Kitin and no one agrees they are enemies or even a problem. Where does that leave your events?

Or if people can't agree on some basic definations that say what a Karavan is, then what is the point of having a Karavan. In fact if there is never meant to be some basic definations concerning story elements, why bother with the lore and why bother designing a game around that lore. It obviously means nothing.

raynes wrote:I rp my character according to the lore set forth by the game. The write up about the Kami says that they oppose the Karavan. YOU CAN NOT ARGUE THAT. Now explain to me how I am suppose to oppose the Karavan (and it's followers) if there is no clear answer as to what the Karavan and their followers represent?

Again the makers of this game have come up with a story that features two opposing religions. The Karavan and the Kami. In order for one to oppose the other there has to be a clear understanding what one is about.

According to what I read on the main website, the Kami oppose the Karavan because they believe the Karavan are enslaving the Matis and Tryker sects of homins using thier devotion to Jena to blind them to thier bidding. In fact, to quote the IC explaination on the main Kami page-

http://www.ryzom.com/?page=lore_higher_kami wrote:Remember, your destiny is linked to the life of Atys, homin, and not to the false prophecy of the Karavan. They are foreigners here, invading creatures come from afar to steal our resources, they care not a bit for the welfare of Atys.

When looking at the main Karavan site, you read pretty much the same thing regarding the Kami, that they're evil spirits trying to enslave homins to thier bidding.

That's a pretty clear outline as to how the NPC's see the different sides of the faction war. You don't have to know what a Karavan really believes at all to oppose them if you follow your own concept of what the Kami believe.

However the individual roleplayers on either side choose to interpret the loosely given npc dynamics, well, makes for more than half the fun.

And as for "arguing" anything, my appologies for sounding fecescious, but yes, I can, because it's a fictional universe. As can anyone coming in looking to create a character and do something unique and cool with roleplay. That's just my point.

The minute you or anyone decides something can only be one way, someone else will have an idea that conflicts. That budgeons roleplay police, and a real mess and alot of unhappy people who were just trying to play thier character how they wanted.

All of a sudden something happens like.. a Karavan saves a Kami's life from a rampaging Kitin, and the world shifts.

That flexibility is what makes story great.

Takashi wrote:You are welcome to your opinions, but don't try to take that right away from other people.

This goes for everyone else too.

Takashi
Ryzom GM
Windermeer Events Team

and Thank you, Takashi, for making your voice heard here. It is refreshing to see GM's taking note and interest in the events of players, as it is something somewhat unheard of in alot of games out there currently. I think you summarized what I've been trying to say better than I have, not to mention fifty times shorter.. heh. *thinks to self- must work on wordiness issues*
But thank you. Seeing a GM step in reaffirms my choice in having gone with ryzom for my gaming platform for roleplay.

eohlwyn wrote:According to what I read on the main website, the Kami oppose the Karavan because they believe the Karavan are enslaving the Matis and Tryker sects of homins using thier devotion to Jena to blind them to thier bidding. In fact, to quote the IC explaination on the main Kami page-

When looking at the main Karavan site, you read pretty much the same thing regarding the Kami, that they're evil spirits trying to enslave homins to thier bidding.

That's a pretty clear outline as to how the NPC's see the different sides of the faction war. You don't have to know what a Karavan really believes at all to oppose them if you follow your own concept of what the Kami believe.

Then you haven't read the information pertaining to the the Kami and the Karavan. From the Higher Power section of the lore:

From the Mara Fragments:
http://www.ryzom.com/?page=lore_higher_kami_mara
""The Karavan represents a minor menace for them. The magnetic fields that their technology and machinery emit perturb plant life. Furthermore, years of Karavan gathering resources thanks to links with homins is beginning to wear down the planet's natural reserves. "

In the entire Mara fragments, the one article that explains the position of the Kami cleary. It is all written from the standpoint of them being the guardians of nature and opposing things that threaten nature. The Kami are against the Karavan because they hurt the nature of Atys. The above quote clearly states that is the fact.

The quote you took is a Kami telling the reader (a Homin) why they should join the Kami forces and not the Karavan forces. You can tell that it is a Kami talking to the reader (a homin) from the word "your". Furthermore the quote you took goes back to the idea that the main goal of the Kami is to protect the enviroment by the fact it talks about stealing resources and not looking out for the welfare of Atys. There is nothing in that statement about homins doing any bidding and there is certainly nothing about enslaving the Matis or Tryker.

As for the reason the Karavan are against the Kami:

From the Flanagan Files:
http://www.ryzom.com/?page=lore_higher_karavan_flanagan

"Kamis represent serious rivals. Not only do they rally many homins to their cause to the detriment of the Karavan, but they are also resistant to the latter's technology. The Kamis also prevent them from setting up base camps on Atys."

It has nothing to do with the Kami enslaving homins. The reason the Karavan are against the Kami is because they are preventing them from establishing a presence on Atys. The statement of rallying homins goes along with this idea, as the more homins that do not rally to the Karavan cause, the harder it becomes to establish themselves on the planet.


This is why I get annoyed. It's one thing to interpret the lore a certain way, it's an entire other to completly ignore very specific parts of it. If people want to interpret the reasons why the Kami are so stuck on protecting the environment, there is nothing wrong with that. Likewise if people want to intrepet why the Karavan are taking resources and want to put bases on Atys, that is also ok. But it is not ok to have people ignoring specific parts of lore so their intrepratation will make sense.

Look if you want to interpret that the Kami hate the Karavan, you need to come up with the reasons why your interpet it that way. You said that it has to do with the Karavan enslaving the Matis and the Trykes. Well where does it say that? You gave a quote but no where in that quote does it mention anything like that. So what are you basing that interpratation on?

Takashi wrote:Raynes just because you interpret things one way doesn't mean that everyone else must do the same. You are welcome to your opinions, but don't try to take that right away from other people.

This goes for everyone else too.

Takashi
Ryzom GM
Windermeer Events Team

Thank you!

raynes wrote:But it is not ok to have people ignoring specific parts of lore so their intrepratation will make sense.

*laughs*... you really don't know much about religion or history, do you?

And thankyou Takashi. I guess that when the GMs decide something needs to be done about moving the storyline forward, they'll do it, huh? You need to have more faith, Raynes.

First of all, this all is valuable discussion. Not for interpretations of different factions, but as discussion of different role playing consepts.

raynes wrote:This is why I get annoyed. It's one thing to interpret the lore a certain way, it's an entire other to completly ignore very specific parts of it. (clip clip) But it is not ok to have people ignoring specific parts of lore so their intrepratation will make sense.

Isn't ignoring of a fact interpretation of lore? Isn't there something human in selection of own beliefs? It would take a scientific approach to come up with information without much bias. Are you scientist or priest or just another guy in crazy world?

I am with Eohlwyn - character needs to make sence only in it's own subjective logics. If they defy logics of the world, call them crazy or ignorant.


I would like to see theologic discussion IC rather than OOC <wink>