This State of Neglect

[jhunter]

You might be too afraid of gemmers to do anything more than ignore and avoid, but you should feel free to be cruel to your fellow mundanes who are too friendly.

I can't stress this more. The point where people's attempts at shunning and hating magickers becomes unbelievable (irritatingly so to me) is when they foolishly direct it openly to the magickers themselves. The only people I can see realistically doing this are templars, (who have the power to crush them under their bootheels and have the might of a sorceror-king behind them) possibly some nobles, and fools with a deathwish.

[Rarsh]

The point where people's attempts at shunning and hating magickers becomes unbelievable (irritatingly so to me) is when they foolishly direct it openly to the magickers themselves.

I'm trying to figure this out for myself, without much luck. So I'm not disagreeing, just looking for clarification, when I say ... why is it foolish for people to openly shun/hate magickers themselves? Given Rindan's v.helpful post, this seems not only acceptable, but the default!

"Just because an elementalist in Allanak is treated poorly ..."
"There are people who will endure the prejudice of a city-state ..."
"Within the city-state at least the rules are known, and if observed with a great deal of humility ..."
"... the social structure that brands them as nearly sub-human ..."

So taken together, you have a social structure that brands them as nearly sub-human. They're treated poorly. They endure prejudice. And need to observe the rules with a great deal of humility.

That seems to say that my PC might direct a great amount of hostility to them personally, and openly. And that certainly that's the social default. Yes, they're super-powerful ... but they're -gemmed-, too. They're under the Highlord's control. So it's like tormenting a lion in a cage, or something.

I've asked the staff about the range of socially-appropriate treatment, but appear to be having trouble wording the question clearly. So any opinions are helpful ...

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Caged?!?!

They have a collar with a little tag that says Fido. Where do you see a cage?

Maybe you could say they are leashed, like a lion with a length of sewing thread.

Now, of course, after they snap that thread and break your neck and eat your guts, they will be shot down by bullet or tranq dart, but ... yeh, not caged.

[Rarsh]

They have a collar with a little tag that says Fido. Where do you see a cage?

'Like.' This is called a simile. You don't think that the Highlord and templarate functions as a cage? They have a collar, but don't they -also- have an owner who will kill them if they use powers without permission? (And 'owner' is a metaphor; I'm not saying they're actually slaves.)

Why do they need a 'great deal' of humility if nobody but templars are willing to treat them poorly?

This part of the world is baffling me. You have people who the docs rather unambiguously say are treated poorly and branded as nearly sub-human ... but they're also super-powerful and feared. How do you reconcile those two things? If I just observed RP, and didn't read docs, I'd actually think that gemmers were treated more like nobles than commoners, for reasons too IC to mention. (And with the exception of a handful of characters who I'd think had strange personal grudges against gemmers, and were stupid enough to dare annoying them ...)

[Akaramu]

Rarsh... much love for giving this subject so much thought and consideration. 

[Southie]

So taken together, you have a social structure that brands them as nearly sub-human. They're treated poorly. They endure prejudice. And need to observe the rules with a great deal of humility.

That seems to say that my PC might direct a great amount of hostility to them personally, and openly. And that certainly that's the social default. Yes, they're super-powerful ... but they're -gemmed-, too. They're under the Highlord's control. So it's like tormenting a lion in a cage, or something.

The thing that would deter against open/blatant hostility against gemmed is that most people don't really know what gemmed are capable of. They know, yes, that the gem functions as some sort of control device to keep mages in line, and that's why krathi don't go around blowing up buildings like people say they can. But how well does that gem work? Would it stop a mage from cursing you to have rashes for a week? Would it stop the mage from claiming the souls of your unborn children? What if the mage can go home to his temple and make a voodoo doll of you?

Lots and lots and lots of magick is shrouded in mystery from your average common citizen. They really have no idea what gemmed mages are capable of, what the limitations and restrictions actually are. In general, that would make them very wary of being openly aggressive and hostile towards gemmed. Most would fear, many would hate, but few would really want to openly attract the ire of a gemmed mage themselves.

[Marauder Moe]

A cage prevents a lion from doing harm.

You have no assurances that a gem prevents a magicker from doing harm.

A gem simply means a magicker who does harm will almost certainly be reigned in by the templarate... but not necessarily before you are reduced to a pile of smoldering offal.

[Dalmeth]

You have no assurances that a gem prevents a magicker from doing harm.

A gem simply means a magicker who does harm will almost certainly be reigned in by the templarate... but not necessarily before you are reduced to a pile of smoldering offal.

To the contrary, you know that if they cast something on you, they will most likely be executed.  So what if they put a curse on you that makes your heart rot in a week?  The templarate knows everything, and they will know that this vile freak disobeyed the Highlord's laws.

Knowledge that there will be retribution against magickal retaliation is a fairly good motive to be a little brave in making things hostile for magickers.  Especially when you consider how just about  every commoner in the Known World thinks that bad things will happen to them if they even linger in the same area as a vile witch.  Fear of attracting attention can be overwhelmed by the fact that they don't know if things will be just as bad for being near them.

[Marauder Moe]

You have no assurances that a gem prevents a magicker from doing harm.

A gem simply means a magicker who does harm will almost certainly be reigned in by the templarate... but not necessarily before you are reduced to a pile of smoldering offal.

To the contrary, you know that if they cast something on you, they will most likely be executed.  So what if they put a curse on you that makes your heart rot in a week?  The templarate knows everything, and they will know that this vile freak disobeyed the Highlord's laws.

Yeah, but you'd still be dead.  How is that contrary?

[Rarsh]

Rarsh... much love for giving this subject so much thought and consideration. 

Thanks. My first few weeks, I didn't understand how gemmers weren't -worshiped-. You're on a desert planet. Water is life. And some people can create water from their bodies. That's ... big. But then a clan leader stomped on -that- idea (luckily before my poor PC ever expressed any gemmer-admiration!). So I re-read the docs and got -more- confused.

I'm pretty sure that either I'm not asking the question right, or for some reason I'm unable to hear the answer no matter how many times people explain to me, speaking very slowly and using small words ...

The thing that would deter against open/blatant hostility against gemmed is that most people don't really know what gemmed are capable of. ... In general, that would make them very wary of being openly aggressive and hostile towards gemmed. Most would fear, many would hate, but few would really want to openly attract the ire of a gemmed mage themselves.

So they're only treated poorly by the templarate? I'm not sure what the docs really mean, then. Templars treat -anyone- however they choose. Why do gemmers need to observe the rules not just with humility, but with a 'great deal of' humility? Who treats them so poorly that it's noted in the docs? From whom do they endure such widespread prejudice?

And a better analogy than the caged lion would be what? Someone with no social power, despised as almost subhuman in that social milieu. But with deadly force available. Say an armed African-American gangbanger ex-convict at an Aryan Nations party hosted by the town sheriff and his deputies. Yes, he's armed and could kill anyone--if he wants to die, himself. But is that going to keep them from heaping abuse, and worse, on him? No. They'd probably resent him more that he's armed, that they're scared of him, and that'd push them -further-. To prove that they're not scared of this person they despise.

But clearly I don't really understand the in-game reality. I'm gonna try Ask the Staff again!

[Dalmeth]

Yeah, but you'd still be dead.  How is that contrary?

The concept is that they are strongly deterred from using magickal retaliation.

Anybody in our society can murder someone over an insult or perceived hostility, which is the sort of attitude we are promoting against magickers.  The reason why people don't do it very often is likely because law enforcement officials would catch them and put them in jail for a very long time.  In some states, they would even be put to death.  Either way, if they ignore that deterrent, you're still dead.  It doesn't stop people from being assholes.  Get it?

Add in the fact that you don't know if you'll die just by letting them linger around you, and you'll get a good idea of what could embolden a commoner to be hostile to a magicker.

Commoners don't just fear magickers.  They fear magick in general for its awesome power and seeming unpredictability.  I mean, it causes mutants doesn't it?  What would it do to me if I lingered around a magicker for too long?

[Marauder Moe]

Yeah, but you'd still be dead.  How is that contrary?

The concept is that they are strongly deterred from using magickal retaliation.

I'm lost.  Did I say otherwise?

[staggerlee]

Yeah, but you'd still be dead.  How is that contrary?

The concept is that they are strongly deterred from using magickal retaliation.

Anybody in our society can murder someone over an insult or perceived hostility, which is the sort of attitude we are promoting against magickers.  The reason why people don't do it very often is likely because law enforcement officials would catch them and put them in jail for a very long time.  In some states, they would even be put to death.  Either way, if they ignore that deterrent, you're still dead.  It doesn't stop people from being assholes.  Get it?

Add in the fact that you don't know if you'll die just by letting them linger around you, and you'll get a good idea of what could embolden a commoner to be hostile to a magicker.

Commoners don't just fear magickers.  They fear magick in general for its awesome power and seeming unpredictability.  I mean, it causes mutants doesn't it?  What would it do to me if I lingered around a magicker for too long?

So play that ic, it'll sure help bring some mood to the game.  Represent it full tilt.
Just don't oocly judge other people for behaving differently, because they may have their reasons. Not saying you do, but I'm just using you as an example, I know some people do.

Obviously if something isn't being represented in the game our most powerful tool as players is our own rp.  Represent the world the way you feel it needs to be represented, and feel free to use the virtual world to your advantage.   I'd suggest making a personal example, and seeing how many other people catch on.  Argue with your friends, use some charisma and planning.  Make it work.   Submit rp logs of awesome scenes where magickers get shunned.   Work to get them blacklisted from the Gaj. Send Kudos when you see someone else doing a great job at hating. Do something.

Keep in mind though that there's more than one right way to react to magickers, there's an entire human range of emotion available to each and every individual unique character.  Not everyone has to react to them exactly the same way, so don't assume someone is oocly making a mistake based on what their character does ic. This debate's been going on for months, probably years?  Rehashing the same argument on the gdb isn't helping.  I'd say it's time for a new approach.  I'd like to see it move off the gdb and into the game

[Southie]

So they're only treated poorly by the templarate? I'm not sure what the docs really mean, then. Templars treat -anyone- however they choose. Why do gemmers need to observe the rules not just with humility, but with a 'great deal of' humility? Who treats them so poorly that it's noted in the docs? From whom do they endure such widespread prejudice?

They are most certainly not treated poorly only by the templarate. (In fact, sometimes, the templars might treat them better than anybody else does.)

Consider that nearly all the major employers in Allanak refuse to hire gemmed. Of the nine noble houses, only House Oash openly hires gemmed servants. Houses like Borsail and Fale vehemently refuse to be associated with gemmed in any way. In recent memory, Borsail even tried a Senate resolution to have all the gemmed mages expelled from the city. Gemmed mages are typically unwelcome in the nicer, more exclusive locations in the city that nobles frequent.

The merchant houses also do not directly employ gemmed mages for various reasons. They might sometimes contract them out for services, but most merchants would be wise not to do this openly for fear the association would damage their reputation. Even if a gemmed mage might be the best tailor/weaponcrafter/tentmaker in the universe, he almost certainly wouldn't find work with the merchant houses because of what it would do to their image.

To my knowledge, even groups like the Byn don't recruit gemmed mages. They choose to recruit elves and rinthis and even half-breeds, but you don't see gemmers in Byn abas. This is probably because many of the people giving the Byn contracts would be offended to work with a gemmer.

This is all very much out of prejudice and is an example of mages being treated poorly without outright, open hostility. It doesn't end there. A gemmer sitting down at a bar would more often than not find the next two seats to either side of him vacated quickly. Gemmers have to work very, very hard just to be accepted by each individual person they want to interact with. Gaining a commoner's trust would be a battle after that, and even then, the gemmer's friend might not openly acknowledge the relationship because of what the rest of society would think of him.

Defining "being treated poorly" as outright hostility and abuse is probably taking far too narrow a view (but many people seem to do this). Commoners in general do hate the mages, while simultaneously fearing what they can do. There's a sort of mob mentality. You're much more likely to shun, exclude, and be unfair to gemmers when you're part of a group and not singled out. You definitely don't want to give the mage a reason to single you personally out, though. You don't know what they might do to you in response, and is your character REALLY sure there's nothing the gemmed can do to get you back? Does he REALLY trust that the gem keeps the mages from doing anything harmful to him? If there's any uncertainty, is it really worth the risk to him? If he's sure he's safe or willing to take the risk, then go ahead and provoke the mage, but many commoners would probably rather play it safe.

Getting back to the topic at least a bit, I think the staff are being intentionally vague with your questions because there is really no one "right" answer as far as how gemmed should be treated. Some commoners might actually have legitimate IC reasons to associate with, befriend and even love mages. Others will certainly be afraid of they can do and avoid them at all cost. Others still will let that fear lead to anger, and anger to hate, in the immortal words of Master Yoda. But I think only the most brazen of commoners would go around openly confronting and abusing mages in most cases.

I don't think developments in the attitudes toward magick is an issue of staff neglect. I think it's an issue of general evolution based on events some characters have seen. There's one thing I'd like to end with, though, and that is that no matter what your current PC thinks of magick, your next one probably has never seen it at all. I didn't see anyone codedly cast a spell until I had been playing Armageddon for about a year, and it FREAKED MY CHARACTER OUT (and me, too). If we can recreate that awe and fear of magick with every new PC we all play, I think the game would be better off.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Magick is such a terribly powerful thing. Even characters who have been about it for some time and perhaps accepted it are still going to be ... concerned with somebody pops a powerful spell off. Shit, mages could be awed and scared of other mages' powers. It is likely that even PCs with a great deal of knowledge about magick have superstitions about it, or believe things about it at times that are ... just not true. And having misconceptions about the unknown is what makes fear so real.

I certianly think that some PCs that should not care about a magicker or want to be around a magicker have IC reasons for doing so, or being so. I do not choose to fault them for that. I am fairly certian that most players still manage to maintain the balance required, however, between utility and fear. Unless I just happened to play with the fifty most badass roleplayers in the game.

[Marauder Moe]

I've had mages that were afraid of their own power.  They do something and think "Holy shit, did I really just do that?" and then the cold realization of what horrors could happen if they really cut loose and unleashed their full power on, say, a large population.

[Rarsh]

Getting back to the topic at least a bit, I think the staff are being intentionally vague with your questions because there is really no one "right" answer as far as how gemmed should be treated. Some commoners might actually have legitimate IC reasons to associate with, befriend and even love mages. Others will certainly be afraid of they can do and avoid them at all cost. Others still will let that fear lead to anger, and anger to hate, in the immortal words of Master Yoda. But I think only the most brazen of commoners would go around openly confronting and abusing mages in most cases.

As you say, seems from Ask the Staff that there's no 'one right answer.' Seems that terrified silence, the cold shoulder, and openly abusing gemmers are all completely unexceptional IC reactions. (And that, of course, if a PC has reason to befriend or love a gemmers ... that's fine, too.)

I was confusing things by appearing to ask for the -one- attitude toward gemmers (like anything else was wrong and you'd have to be a bad RPer to even -think- of such a thing!), instead of making clear that I was trying to figure the range of unremarkable possibilities, which seems like a pretty broad spectrum from indifference to overt discrimination and abuse.

[Southie]

Just keep in mind the gemmers are free to respond with their own range of reactions as well. A PC can be overtly abusive or hostile at his own risk - the docs certainly don't say mages have to take it lying down.

And that's what fuels the fear. And if it doesn't scare a player, or at least a PC... heh. I think sooner or later they'll end up finding some "correction".

[Rindan]

I think when considering the range of responses to gemmed, you need to keep a few things in mind.

1)  Most commoners are probably absurdly paranoid about magikers and have developed countless superstitious about them.  Think of the silly superstitions that there used to be about Jews, now imagine Jews that can throw fire balls and summon demons and ponder what people might come up with.  For this reason, I think flat out avoidance would be an utterly common approach to a gemmer.  Gemmer coming your way?  Step around it.  It sits down next to you?  Get up and move a few stools down.  One puts down a half empty mug, whatever you do don't drink what is left.   Hell, don't even TOUCH that mug.  You might tear your own beating heart out before letting a magiker perform some evil so called "healing" ritual.  Fear and avoidance are totally reasonable.

2)  There is a very strong social drive to dislike magikers.  This drive comes not only from your fellow commoners, but from the nobility.  While the nobility has been a little distant of late, keep in mind that it would be no hidden secret that nearly all of the noble houses despise gemmed.  Nobility are who the commoners look up to.  Nobility are the embodiment of perfection and set the fashion and social trends for the rest of society.  Where Templars might terrify you with their awesome power, nobles awe you with their perfection (and also terrify you, but not as bad as Templars).  If the highest of Allanak's citizens despise the gemmed, it should be no surprise that the rest of the population follows as they do in all things.

3)  Fear is also balanced in very large part by the awe and the overwhelming belief in the divine powers of the Highlord and the Templars that do his will.  Magikers, while scary, are pocket change to the sort of terror that a pissed Templar should bring out in you.  A magiker is a deviant and a freak, but a Templar is the manifestation of the all powerful Highlord's will, and who could possibly doubt the power of the Highlord?  Just spend a moment gazing upon the largest and most powerful city in all of Zalanthas surrounded by wasteland that are all but certain death on all sides and rest assure that the Highlord is all powerful and that gemmers hardly rate as the smallest of little insects to His power.  In this regard, some commoners fear might be pushed down to allow hatred and prejudice to take over if they feel confidence enough in the Highlords protection to piss on of those collard wretches.  Think of it like the KKK.  You would never see a KKK member preaching his filth in the south side of Chicago for fear of being torn to shreds.  On the other hand, you will find a KKK member preaching in the middle of a liberal bastion if he is surrounded by police and feels confidence that the crowds can't harm him without being taken down by the police.  Sure, some hippie could pull out an AK-47 and blow him away, but he is confident that no one will.  A commoner might feel the same with a magiker.  You might not piss off one in the wastes, but in the Gaj with Templars and solders aplenty near by, you might feel a braver.  Also, don't forget that there are rewards for beating on a magiker.  Snuggling with a magiker is likely to get you spit on.  Bravely kicking the shit out of one is likely to get you a free drink.

So, in large part I think that there is a large range of "normal" reactions towards a gemmed that range from fear, avoidance, and hostility with people easily falling on and in-between this categories.

Finally, as much as I shit on gemmed and people being friendly with them, I don't want people to give the impression that all interaction with them is evil.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with a character who is filled with burning hatred for an enemy getting the guts to seek out a Drovian to place an evil curse on them.  I am just saying that such action would likely cause a terrible internal struggle for the character in question, there would probably be a large element of fear in the meeting, and you sure as shit would do everything possible to NOT be associated with the gemmer in public.  You are basically meeting with satanist to ask for favors during the Inquisition.  It can happen, but it should give you long pause.