Twinking, and semi-twinks

[Taven]

There has been an increasing and disturbing trend of twinks amoung the PCs in Arm. I'd dare to call them "semi-twinks" because they emote just enough to avoid being something you feel you can complain about, or that's my experiance. I know there's times when a person doesn't have enough time to emote, or have to get off, but I'm seeing an increasing disturbing disreguard for emoting and doing things beyond what the code allows. The things I see people doing don't make any IC sense, or it's a far stretch at best.

I'd really like to encourage people to emote more, and spend more time on their role-play, or thinking through what makes sense for their PC, and the world. I can't get into too many specifics, but I think that PCs hunting far too much is getting to be a problem. If you're killing something and taking the time to skin it, you should not be leaving the parts. The parts don't go away quickly, and expecially on something like Gortoks, can pile up to unrealistic amounts. I'd like to propose that if you do have to leave something out, or abandon it for whatever reason, you use the arrange command.

I'd also like to see less purge hunting. If your clan has enough meat, and enough materials (if they collect them) then you might want to think about leaving some of the local wildlife alive for independents, or new characters not hired yet, to get after. Likewise, you don't need to tame every single tameable animal you see.

[jstorrie]

I'd like to see fewer players acting as if it's appropriate to tell others how to play.

[Taven]

I'd like to see fewer players acting as if it's appropriate to tell others how to play.

Isn't it appropriate? I'm making suggestions on how I think things could be played better. It's not appropriate to dictate how  everyone plays their PC, but we do suggest to each other how to play, constantly. It's in many threads, it's in the logs we love, it's in documentation that says what a half-elf is, or how to play a theif well. I think that if there's a problem with how something is being done, then there's no problem in pointing it out.

[Riev]

While I agree with your observations, Taven, I agree with Jstorrie. It isn't up to the players to decide how other players should behave.

[jhunter]

I'd like to see fewer players acting as if it's appropriate to tell others how to play.

QFT. I'd like to see fewer players assuming the worst of their fellow players. Like assuming that "purge hunting" is happening when it's a combination of several players/groups hunting. Assuming that a single player is twink-burglarizing things and wiping out apartments when, in reality, it is several players all unwittingly causing it to appear that way.

Just because you -perceive- a problem because of a negative opinion of your fellow players, it does not mean there is one or that you need to start a thread playing "rp police".

Try changing your attitude and assuming better of your fellow players instead of assumng the worst.

Besides the fact, in my opinion, if someone is causing an IC problem that  is affecting your pc, do something about it ICly and prove yourself the better roleplayer instead of whining on the discussion board about it and going OOC to deal with it.

[Taven]

Besides the fact, in my opinion, if someone is causing an IC problem that  is affecting your pc, do something about it ICly and prove yourself the better roleplayer instead of whining on the discussion board about it and going OOC to deal with it.

Guys? How is it that it's okay to say "Burgulars, don't do this," or "too many magickers" (which does come up every few months), or any number of other things, but not this?

I don't think anything I've said was unreasonable. I don't think a reminder of this is bad. I'm not trying to say that "i iz l33t, newbs! lulz," I'm trying to suggest things to be a solution to what I see as a problem. I think deciding off the bat that I'm whining about it or forcefully telling anyone what to do is acting too fast.

[Cutthroat]

No one here is deciding what anyone should be doing, except those telling Taven to not complain, or do something else.

Taven's entire post is worded in an encouraging manner. Follow it, or don't. I think everyone would agree that a reminder to treat the world in a normal way is not a bad thing.

[jhunter]

I'm saying that assuming that others aren't doing so is a bad thing. That's how it comes across to me, just like every other post bitching about the rp of others. I wasn't singling Taven out. I don't like the other posts that come across regarding magick or burglaring or anything else of a similar tone either.
It comes across to me as very discouraging and preachy to others, the complete opposite of what you are saying it is.

[X-D]

Taven's entire post is worded in an encouraging manner

No, in fact the post is not.

There has been an increasing and disturbing trend of twinks amoung the PCs in Arm. I'd dare to call them "semi-twinks" because they emote just enough to avoid being something you feel you can complain about, or that's my experiance. I know there's times when a person doesn't have enough time to emote, or have to get off, but I'm seeing an increasing disturbing disreguard for emoting and doing things beyond what the code allows. The things I see people doing don't make any IC sense, or it's a far stretch at best.

Taven failed to state that they have a personal definition to the term "twink" That this does not match at all with the doc/staff definition to the term.

"Twink" By staff/doc def is ignoring the world or your PC as a person.  Examples given in docs, Sparring for several real life days straight without reguard for injury etc. Ignoring the NPC of VNPC population. Example given, stealing from the same NPC over and over even though it is yelling "Stop! Thief!" over and over.

Emote is NOT roleplay, not emoting is NOT twinking.

It might be a boring PC but that is about it.

It has NOTHING at all to do with emoting. Period, End of story.

(edit)

Also, such posts will make newbs think "Hey, as long as I emote, its alright!"

This is wrong, no amount of emoting, thinking, change mood, or feels make actual twinking alright.

[Lizzie]

I agree with both, actually. I believe with the sentiment of Taven's post. I disagree with how he explained the concern.

I feel, that if you are going to do something that you are pretty sure, wouldn't make much IC sense to someone observing..it would be a courteous thing to toss in an emote.

I don't feel that anyone should feel obligated to do so. However, I also don't feel I should be obligated to assume that your character has a perfectly reasonable explanation for his actions, if he doesn't demonstrate any perfectly reasonable explanation.

So it goes both ways, I think. I would -like- my character to respond to your character's behavior appropriately. It would make it easier (and much more enjoyable) for me to do so, if you would demonstrate your character's behavior with a little more detail than "etwo axe;kill skeet;skin skeet;get all;mount inix;west."

Note please, I have no idea who Taven is referring to, so this isn't directed to anyone in particular. I'm just putting to words my opinion on his concern.

[jhunter]

However, I also don't feel I should be obligated to assume that your character has a perfectly reasonable explanation for his actions, if he doesn't demonstrate any perfectly reasonable explanation.

Others shouldn't feel obligated to display openly all the internal thoughts and feelings of their character just to explain why they are doing things to other characters. RL is not that way and it's rather unrealistic to expect people to play realistic characters and have them be open books to others as well.

Real people aren't open books for everyone they come across to read and understand perfectly either.

Are you saying that you -do- feel obligated to assume the worst of your fellow player rather than assume the best of your fellow player?

This is the sort of attitude that I have a problem with and I feel does nothing to help the game, only to harm it.

[Lizzie]

I'm saying, what I already said. If I meant something more than that, I would have said so.

[jhunter]

It comes across to me as you stating that, if they are not going to display their reasoning for all to see, then you do not feel that (as your fellow player) they deserve the courtesy of assuming they have a good reason to do so and therefore, assuming the worst of them?

That's what I'm directly asking you. If so, then my comment on your statement stands, if not, then maybe you will do me the courtesy of clarifying what you meant by that statement.

[Lizzie]

Bolded to clarify:

I agree with both, actually. I believe with the sentiment of Taven's post. I disagree with how he explained the concern.

I feel, that if you are going to do something that you are pretty sure, wouldn't make much IC sense to someone observing..it would be a courteous thing to toss in an emote.

I don't feel that anyone should feel obligated to do so. However, I also don't feel I should be obligated to assume that your character has a perfectly reasonable explanation for his actions, if he doesn't demonstrate any perfectly reasonable explanation.

So it goes both ways, I think. I would -like- my character to respond to your character's behavior appropriately. It would make it easier (and much more enjoyable) for me to do so, if you would demonstrate your character's behavior with a little more detail than "etwo axe;kill skeet;skin skeet;get all;mount inix;west."

Note please, I have no idea who Taven is referring to, so this isn't directed to anyone in particular. I'm just putting to words my opinion on his concern.

Translation: "should" does not mean "must." "Should feel obligated" does not mean "must" or "is required." "I feel" does not mean "This is truth, the only truth, or any particular fact or statement of fact."

"It would make it easier" does not mean "You must" or "I'll be pissed if you don't" or "If you don't comply I'll complain or force negative IC actions on your ass." "a little" means "some," not "every possible semblance of." "any" refers to - some, not all, not lots, not every possible...demonstration. Most often, this includes, but is not exclusive to, tossing in an emote once in awhile. Once in awhile does not mean every moment, or between every single coded syntax of the game code. It means - once in awhile.

Now - what part of this are you still unclear about?

[jhunter]

Okay, then I stand by my statement. This assuming the worst of others unless they act unrealistically to be "an open book" is the kind of bullshit attitude we need less of in this community. I detest this attitude.

It would be much easier and more respectful of others to just play your character realistically and assume that everyone else is doing the same rather than assume that you are the only one doing so.

[Taven]

Excuse me, but I think we could all take a minute to stop and relax. I don't think anyone is trying to force anyone to do anything, that we're just making suggestions. I would like to think that our armageddon community is mature enough to be able to discuss things without turning it into a huge blame-flame thread. I don't think anyone wants that.

[Lizzie]

Nowhere in my post did I make any statement about how my character would feel about you, the player. Let's try this again.

I AM NOT OBLIGATED

To force my character

to assume that your character

has a logical purpose

for his behavior

UNLESS

I am presented with
some demonstration
thereof.

That means, I *CAN* have my character make that assumption, if it makes sense for my character to make that assumption. I can ALSO have my character assume otherwise, if it makes sense for my character to assume otherwise. The onus is on you, to present to me, something to work with. If you don't give me something to work with, then the onus is on me, to decide what do do about that lack.

[jhunter]

There has been an increasing and disturbing trend of twinks amoung the PCs in Arm.

When the first line of the first post of the thread starts off like this it doesn't sound much like friendly suggestions it sounds like a negative attitude and finger-pointing. Perhaps you could have started the thread off differently?

I have no problem with friendly suggestions intended to help others. This thread starts off as nothing of the sort.

If this was not your intentions, then perhaps a friendly staffer would be so kind to delete the thread and then you can start over with a different foot forward?

[jhunter]

Nowhere in my post did I make any statement about how my character would feel about you, the player. Let's try this again.

I AM NOT OBLIGATED

To force my character

to assume that your character

has a logical purpose

for his behavior

UNLESS

I am presented with
some demonstration
thereof.

That means, I *CAN* have my character make that assumption, if it makes sense for my character to make that assumption. I can ALSO have my character assume otherwise, if it makes sense for my character to assume otherwise. The onus is on you, to present to me, something to work with. If you don't give me something to work with, then the onus is on me, to decide what do do about that lack.

NOWHERE DID I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR CHARACTER. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ATTITUDES OF THE PLAYERS ABOUT OTHER PLAYERS.

THANK YOU.

Would it at all be IC for your character to suddenly think to themselves: Hey..that guy must be twinking because I can't see why he's doing what he's doing? No, it wouldn't.

I'm talking about we, the players behind the characters, and our attitudes toward others when it comes to the rp of our characters.

[Taven]

Okay, then I stand by my statement. This assuming the worst of others unless they act unrealistically to be "an open book" is the kind of bullshit attitude we need less of in this community. I detest this attitude.

It would be much easier and more respectful of others to just play your character realistically and assume that everyone else is doing the same rather than assume that you are the only one doing so.

I don't think anyone is asking for an open book. I think that emoting when you're doing an action is good, especially a physical action. You can give people hints to what your PC is thinking without being an open book, or obvious. Hemotes are an excellent tool for this. Emoting to show that your PC isn't showing what they're thinking, or is being mysterious, is fine too.

I know emoting doesn't equal role-play, but it helps to bring your character and the world around them to life.

[hyzhenhok]

Okay, then I stand by my statement. This assuming the worst of others unless they act unrealistically to be "an open book" is the kind of bullshit attitude we need less of in this community. I detest this attitude.

It would be much easier and more respectful of others to just play your character realistically and assume that everyone else is doing the same rather than assume that you are the only one doing so.

I don't think anyone is asking for an open book. I think that emoting when you're doing an action is good, especially a physical action. You can give people hints to what your PC is thinking without being an open book, or obvious. Hemotes are an excellent tool for this. Emoting to show that your PC isn't showing what they're thinking, or is being mysterious, is fine too.

I know emoting doesn't equal role-play, but it helps to bring your character and the world around them to life.

But emoting or the lack thereof it doesn't have anything to do with the supposed rise of twinkery mentioned in the first post.

Though I will agree that people should junk the stuff that they skin but don't want.

[Taven]

I think twinking is traditionally defined as working to constantly up your skills. My definition is a little more liberal then that. If you're using skills that don't make sense to apply, or taking advantage of the world unrealisticly, you're twinking.

My post was not made based on one event. It's been something that's been bugging me for a few months now, and doesn't seem to be resolving itself.

[Olgaris]

You guys are all a bunch of mean jerks.