Zalanthian Culture: Embrace your HATE

[Taven]

Killing them for violating social norms that your character holds is decent roleplay.

OOC carping on the forum is not.

As for getting karma for enforcing docs, well, no wonder people are bitching that this game feel static if you're setting down guidelines for how all characters must behave. I haven't seen that in my time here. Nobody in authority has sent me any emails telling me I can or can't do something. The only background I've ever had not approved was my first one where my dwarf had a beard.

So I'm left with the gut feeling that staff cares less about this than the roleplay police do.

In my experience, staff just wants you to have justification for your character's feelings and motives, and to take the docs into consideration and respect them even (especially) when you're playing outside social norms.

If social norms were 100% binding at all times, no one would ever pursue sorcery.

I agree with Beethoven. If you are going to be an exception to the docs, then you should be showing it as a progression, showing why, showing the internal struggle and debate as you act different from the cultural standard.

Miradus, as has been stated before, this isn't about a single player RPing a certain way. This is about Zalanthas as a whole and how the playerbase as a whole is playing things out. There are rules on how the vast majority of the Zalathian population behaves, this is the documentation. That's just part of the game. There ARE room for exceptions, for individuality, and for uniqueness. However, when the overarching cultural expectations of the game are not being reflected in the playerbase as a whole, then there is a problem.

Staff does care how people behave. As mentioned, this is reflected in karma and account notes. If you show a good understanding of the game world, in theory, you are also more likely to be given a chance at leadership roles. But those are all the OOC impacts. I don't really care about that, so much as the IC status of cultural consistency.

[Armaddict]

Many indeed do it as a progression. I've had reason to do this on occasion. But everyone else, including staff, only gets exposed to snapshots.

In my experience, no one asks, ic or ooc, why they are an exception. They just make a note, hate them for it, whatever.

But as a general rule, I agree. I am anti-care bear. The role play of fear, hate, and mistrust has been subject to a ton of critique over the years though. I've kind of resigned to some people doing it, and others just not having it in them to separate hurting a character's feelings from the player's.


Edit:  Some autocorrect fail from phone.

[Miradus]

That's kind of my thing.

If I'm going to be an ass to someone, it's generally because with a previous character I've roleplayed with them, enjoyed it, and want to have some more fun from a different angle. I don't really want to just be an antagonist randomly.

[boog]

I can't believe people are saying staff should make what is already documented on the website a rule, or post about it on the GDB when it is already written lut, clear cut, on the website.

Murder, Corruption, Betrayal, all woven together by hate and superstition and strict social hierachies.

Mingya.

[Jingo]

Here I go again coming out of the woodwork to comment when I shouldn't.

I'm of the personal opinion that documentation and racial roleplay in particular need to updated to reflect the game world reality.

Elves in particular are in such a bad state that they've been backed into a nearly unplayable corner. Not even through the documentation, but through player-generated assumptions about the application of that documentation.

Yes you can interpret elves as stealing everything that isn't nailed down. But It's just as fine to interpret elven relationships as a long con with no immediate payoff that slowly settles into a relationship of trust. I think anyone with any particular insight can see that elves are potentially the most loyal friends someone could ever have, provided that elf's trust is earned.

Racism isn't really a facet that's explored in the documentation either, it's just a weird sort of head-canon that players have developed and then encoded into game policy. So I'm not saying not to be racist in character. But I really wish people wouldn't direct it at elves more than dwarves, half-elves and half-giants.

[bardlyone]

I think that the racism against elves is about right, slightly overdone perhaps. But I definitely agree I'd like to see dwarves and HG's see more racism. Unless you know for a fact that the dwarf's focus is perfectly in line with your goals, that dwarf's just about useless as an employee. And half giants have the intelligence of little more than a child which means they may well be perfectly loyal but all it takes is the first elf or human to come along and trick them, and all your investment in them's for naught. And so on and so forth. I dislike that there is so little racism against dwarves and half-giants, but I think the biggest thing making city elves "almost unplayable" is a lack of actual tribes, and the long wait and approval/preapproval process plus superimposed outside limitations on the creation of tribes in tandem with that lack. If either of those two factors changed, it would be a huge boon to elven playability.

[nauta]

I think the biggest thing making city elves "almost unplayable" is a lack of actual tribes, and the long wait and approval/preapproval process plus superimposed outside limitations on the creation of tribes in tandem with that lack. If either of those two factors changed, it would be a huge boon to elven playability.

There wasn't a long wait for me.

I wouldn't mind experimenting with eliminating this line:

"Only four (4) PC members are allowed per family or tribe--and not just four alive at one time, but four PCs, total. This includes your PC."

Change it to something like:

"Only four (4) PC members are allowed alive at one time per family or tribe, including your PC.  If there are no PCs in the tribe, then the tribe is dead (i.e., fully virtual and no longer open to play).  Otherwise, people can keep applying for a role as long as there is an open slot.  There is a six month pause before you can re-apply for the same tribe."

Hence, if three of your tribemembers die, you can refresh the role call.  If all four die, well, nice run, game over.

[bardlyone]

I think the biggest thing making city elves "almost unplayable" is a lack of actual tribes, and the long wait and approval/preapproval process plus superimposed outside limitations on the creation of tribes in tandem with that lack. If either of those two factors changed, it would be a huge boon to elven playability.

There wasn't a long wait for me.

I wouldn't mind experimenting with eliminating this line:

"Only four (4) PC members are allowed per family or tribe--and not just four alive at one time, but four PCs, total. This includes your PC."

Change it to something like:

"Only four (4) PC members are allowed in the game at one time per family or tribe, including your PC.  If there are no PCs in the tribe, then the tribe is dead (i.e., fully virtual and no longer open to play).  Otherwise, people can keep applying for a role as long as there is an open slot.  There is a six month pause before you can re-apply for the same tribe."

Hence, if three of your tribemembers die, you can refresh the role call.  If all four die, well, nice run, game over.

That seems like a reasonable amendment and one that would make the process of maintaining created player tribes much more viable.

For what it's worth, I meant as much with regard to recruiting and setting up etc other players, as the wait time on the approval itself, basically, there's a lot of steps involved in getting even the first members squared away and approved, before you can even look for players to fill the roles, then come the recruitment threads. Then comes the pms. Then comes the possible waits on storage, definite waits on app approvals and writing of descs, and so forth.

[nauta]

I'm not sure if this would be helpful or not, but I thought I'd comb through the documentation and pull out the relevant bits of racism/anti-magickism/classism/xenophobia documented... I then kind of ran out of time.

Unless I missed the big help file (a search of 'racism' turned up nothing), one thing that surprised me was how little there is in the documentation about racism (and friends).  Perhaps a help file on racism (and friends) with examples -- from the perspective of an Allanaki human at least -- would be in order?  (Or maybe it's out there and I couldn't find it.)

A Human (from Allanak).

Summary: Motivation for Allanaki human racism is underdetermined, but it would appear to stem from the view that humans are superior, and this from the fact that Tektolnes is a human and (implicit) the fact that he rules the city.  As to anti-magickism, this is pretty crystal clear: fear of the unknown.  As to xenophobia against tribals, this isn't very clear at all.  As to classism against rinthers, this isn't clear.  Classism against commoners is owing to the view that nobles are a better breed.

In general:

Humans are considered the norm against which other races are, fairly or unfairly, judged. Quite likely this is a result of the human origins of both Muk Utep and Tektolnes, but it is distinctly possible that either all other races are descended from human stock or that at one time humans comprised a vast majority of the population of Zalanthas.

Views towards magick:

Magick is a mysterious and very rare power on Zalanthas, about which the general public knows very little, and generally fears and hates a great deal. While magickers are tolerated in some places, they are generally feared and distrusted by the vast majority of the population of Zalanthas. In many places, magickers are killed upon discovery, and even the rumor that one is a magicker can lead to one's death.

The Elementalists' Quarter, in the northwest of the city, is where the feared magick users are segregated

Views towards dwarves/half-giants/muls:
Surprisingly, I couldn't find anything!  Muls are slaves (or ex-slaves) and so property.  Half-giants are dumb.  Dwarves have strange foci...  Anyone find anything?

Views towards elves:
Surprisingly, all I could find was in the half-elf doc:

Humans see a half-elf as a product of the untrustworthy filth that is an elf...

Views towards tribals:
I couldn't find anything substantive here, but there's a longstanding tradition in game of a kind of xenophobia -- see terms like 'duneblood'.

Views towards rinthers:

The Labyrinth (often referred to as the 'rinth) is home to most of Allanak's criminal population, and most citizens avoid it like the plague. Strangely enough, the 'rinth is also where many of the city's small to medium-sized business contracts are negotiated, now that much of the economy has gone underground.

Views towards nobles:

Many commoners may have little idea what a noble's life really entails, but they know that nobles are simply a better breed than they.

Views towards half-elfs:

Accepted by neither humans nor elves, half-elves tend to be extremely self-reliant, and they pride themselves on this trait. ...

As a bastard offspring of conflicting cultures, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a half-elf to be accepted anywhere. Humans see a half-elf as a product of the untrustworthy filth that is an elf, and elves see half-elves as weak and tribeless; and half-elves have no culture of their own. To make things worse, most half-elves have little or no support from their parents. They are typically formed by violence - whether it be a literal conception by rape, or the prejudice heaped upon those that raise or care for them.
...
Because half-elves can never be fully integrated into either human or elven society, a half-elf's history is littered with memories of rejections and slights, both real and perceived.
...
If their audience (or society in general) accepts the half-elf, respects their deeds, or otherwise welcomes them, this may be perceived as an insult to his independence.
...
On the other hand, if the half-elf is ridiculed, ignored, or turned away, all the worse! This just proves that they do not need others.

An elf (from Allanak).

Summary: For city elves, xenophobia seems to stem from (a) a lingering sense of superiority left-over from their nomadic ancestors and (b) a tribal culture that inculcates a distrust of those outside the tribe.

Elves highly distrust anyone who is not part of their immediate family, or of their tribe, who has not been tested severely to earn their trust.
...
Because they are already provided with companions in the form of family, tribal elves and those with a small grouping that is their family will find less reason to make companions out of outsiders. Tribeless elves, armed with their overwhelming distrust for anyone but themselves, will likely find much reason to apply tests to determine those that are loyal, and those that are not.
...
The mixture of pride, nomadic tendencies, and the natural ability to run makes all elves ridicule the riding of mounts. To rely upon another beast to carry one around is considered an extreme sign of weakness among elves (even more than the inability to steal!).

It is sometimes said that most elves forgive the riding of mounts by other races, but this isn't entirely true. While they realize that it is customary for some other races to ride mounts, they still perceive it as a sign of weakness. It usually doesn't change much, however, as the pride and tribal nature of elves makes them think of others as weak to begin with.

Views towards magickers:
Nothing explicit, but presumably city elves would have the same views towards magickers as humans.

Views towards rinthers:
Nothing explicit, but the eastside of the Labyrinth is where a lot of city elves live (but not exclusively).

Desert Elves/Kuraci/Coded Tribals.  

I believe the clan documentation has information on these.

Someone from Morins/Cenyr/Mul Outpost/Red Storm Village

Not sure.

[Armaddict]

I've never found city-elves unplayable.  That is very important.  They are -not- unplayable.  Nor are they boring, or fucked, or any of this other drivel.  Elves are completely capable of doing whatever you want to do with them, as long as you aren't going in with the expectation of everyone loving you and involving you or getting into clans that you already know you can't get into.  There is a good reason why they're usually at least half-dipped into the criminal element, and why they're careful who they trust.

That being said, that in no way shape or form speaks out against the idea that city elves, properly functioning, would have clan options, but I'm far more in favor of city elf tribes being apped into than an IC recruitment clan.  And I'm far more in favor of there being 2 or 3 small tribes than one big one.  2 or 3 small ones emphasizes the weakness and strength of the elves.  If you piss off one tribe, it sucks.  If you fuck up enough to unify all of them against you, you just seriously fucked up.  But the latter is hard to do because their allegiance is to themselves.  Not to the 'rinth.  Not to other criminals.  Not to templars, not to soldiers, not to mages, not to sorcerers.  It's their tribe.  Involvement in matters that don't concern their tribe are purely on a 'benefit for no cost' scenario.

I'm not sure where the idea that westside is anti-elf came from, but it's been perpetuated long enough that elven options are no longer there.  But I used to run my elves with the Guild often.  The Guild used to have PC leaders who were elves.  Not sure why this shift came about, but it's meh and not as important as it is puzzling...an elf acting alone and building his own network of trusted individuals over a long course of time can make themselves stronger than many IC clans get.

I don't find the amount of racism against elves lacking at all.  But I also am very firmly rooted, as a frequent player of them, in opposition to this thing that comes up now and again calling them unplayable.  It's like someone dipped their toes into the pool, felt it was colder than their liking, and as a result, the pool is useless.

[Reiloth]

Agree with Armaddict.

[Jingo]

Unplayable might be hyperbole. But I don't think it's far off. You need to stretch the elven documentation to it's limits to make a city-elf role properly work and isolate yourself from most of the playerbase that will just as likely find some lame reason to kill you. Not to mention a slough of other problems that make city-elves pointlessly difficult. This has been hashed over a thousand times.

The bottom line is, is that if I want to play an outsider character that might get some hate; I'll just play a half-elf.

[bardlyone]

Eh, the docs themselves make elves unplayable for me. I don't typically do stealth roles or enjoy being the one on the committing side of thievery IC.

That said, I'm with Jingo on the half-elves thing. If I'm not playing a human, it's usually in favor of a half elf. I think half elf hate is very dichotomous IC. People either totally overplay it or totally underplay it, in my experience, though it does even out after a point, to sort of an okay middle ground, it could still be stepped up a little.

[Reiloth]

Eh, I don't find them particularly difficult to play, and i've played more than a few. I think if you're an ACHIEVEMENT player, you aren't going to find city elves very developed or fun. Or if you are an EXPLORER player, you aren't going to get very far with an elf. I dunno what kind of player I am. I guess I enjoy the RP of the moment which City Elves can provide plenty of. A tribe is nice, when they are around. I'd prefer to see more of them in the game, or to have their debilitating pride/fear of mounts disappear over time.

[bardlyone]

99% explorer on the bartle test, and I also just don't like taking stuff from others. Elves will never be my cup of tea because of the qualities that make them elves.

I get other people's points about the tribe angle though, and appreciate them.

[nauta]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSMLx44DqFc

[Yam]

I'm 67% griefer. I'll hate for you weak-willed ninnies.

[nauta]

I was thinking about this a little more.  As a post-enlightenment person living in the 21st century in the ivory tower, it's hard to really get into the mindset of a bona fide xenophobe.  (I also had troubles understanding Trump supporters.)  This, I think, makes RPing a xenophobe a daunting task, and I think I might not be alone here.

There are a couple approaches -- but I think the main thing is to not compare Zalanthan racism to RL racism in the last couple hundred years.  You have to reach much much further back in history to get good examples.

1. Externally-motivated racism. Treat racism (and friends) as a primitive view based on naivity that, once the light gets shined and you realize that your racism (and friend) was based on a misconception and lack of knowledge, you abandon it: hey, that magicker didn't curse me, or that elf didn't steal from me, etc.  Hence, you still put on the facade of racism (and friends) when in good company but on the sly you'll kank that elf, breed, gemmed, or whatever, because even though society still thinks its gross, you've become enlightened.

2. Internally-motivated racism. Treat racism (and friends) as deeply-set superstitious personal beliefs.  No matter how many times you meet an exception -- a gick that doesn't curse you -- you just can't chase that chill deep down inside that there's just something gross about gicks, elves, etc.  Consider a snake handler, or someone that trains lions, or something: you might be comfortable enough to work with them, but you still feel inside its gross.  Hence, on this view, you wouldn't kank that elf, breed, gemmed, regardless of what society says.  On this view: even if society thinks its fine, you still think its gross and you just can't shake that feeling..

I don't know if that's clear, but I think what works better for me and feels more Zalanthan is #2.  (One reason I like #2 is because if my character does fuck/have feelings for that elf or breed, she feels really gross about it and it creates psychological conflict.)

[Lizzie]

I think a big factor is the word itself. People are responding to racism. The docs refer to racism. It's not racism. It's speciesism. Elves aren't a race. They're a species. There's no racism on Armageddon - you won't find humans having learned notions about black people vs. whites, tablelands tribals vs. Red Storm denizens. It's more of a "orangutan vs. gorilla vs. chimpanzee" kind of comparison. For humans in Armageddon, the elf might be considered the rhesis monkey version of the various humanoid species, while for elves, humans might be considered the chimpanzee version of humanoid species. They're not all humans with different colors or genetic traits. They're completely different species. That is WHY dwarves and humans produce muls. That is WHY half-elves are reviled. That is WHY they're considered "abominations." Because you're not just boinking a guy with different colored skin. You're boinking a creature from another species entirely.

[nauta]

I think a big factor is the word itself. People are responding to racism. The docs refer to racism. It's not racism. It's speciesism. Elves aren't a race. They're a species. There's no racism on Armageddon - you won't find humans having learned notions about black people vs. whites, tablelands tribals vs. Red Storm denizens. It's more of a "orangutan vs. gorilla vs. chimpanzee" kind of comparison. For humans in Armageddon, the elf might be considered the rhesis monkey version of the various humanoid species, while for elves, humans might be considered the chimpanzee version of humanoid species. They're not all humans with different colors or genetic traits. They're completely different species. That is WHY dwarves and humans produce muls. That is WHY half-elves are reviled. That is WHY they're considered "abominations." Because you're not just boinking a guy with different colored skin. You're boinking a creature from another species entirely.

Yeah, I agree with this.  I think its helpful to sometimes think of it like bestiality (at least vis-a-vis the different species).  Anti-magickism is different (and easier to grasp I think).  Xenophobia (Allanaki citizen vs. tribal) is a little less obvious.

[Miradus]

If you look at it from a biological perspective, cross-species xenophobia is a survival trait. These different species are competing for the same resources.

[Malifaxis]

I think a big factor is the word itself. People are responding to racism. The docs refer to racism. It's not racism. It's speciesism. Elves aren't a race. They're a species. There's no racism on Armageddon - you won't find humans having learned notions about black people vs. whites, tablelands tribals vs. Red Storm denizens. It's more of a "orangutan vs. gorilla vs. chimpanzee" kind of comparison. For humans in Armageddon, the elf might be considered the rhesis monkey version of the various humanoid species, while for elves, humans might be considered the chimpanzee version of humanoid species. They're not all humans with different colors or genetic traits. They're completely different species. That is WHY dwarves and humans produce muls. That is WHY half-elves are reviled. That is WHY they're considered "abominations." Because you're not just boinking a guy with different colored skin. You're boinking a creature from another species entirely.

Well, true, but keep in mind that people of lesser races breed with the Irish all the time.  We just call those children Demi-Gods.

I guess what I am saying is maybe not all halfbreeds are b....

Sorry, threw up in my mouth a little there.

Carry on.

[Jihelu]

I wonder why Breeds are so easy to make then, eh?



I remember a post from a while back joking that what if a noble's aide/scientist/whatever the fuck found out everyone has a little elf blood in them and that the results should never come out openly.

[Rokal]

Hate is far too bland a spice to pepper 90% of Zalanthas with.

I'd fear magickers quicker than hate them. I fear snakes, but they're beautiful and interesting from a distance. I just don't want to get close to one.

I'd pity breeds before hating them. Because they're broken by definition and will never have acceptance (real acceptance) or emotional stability in most cases.

I distrust people from the other city-state before hating them, because they might be spies. Though I might hate aspects of their culture.

There are a lot of different negative ways to react. I think hate is overplayed, and most of the time, people put as much thought and depth into how 'hate' manifests as they do into how to play a 'villain', and it often comes off one dimensional and forced.

I agree fully with you here, I find that hate is often the most overplayed one, theres many ways to be negative to someone without acting on hate alone.

[Miradus]

I wonder why Breeds are so easy to make then, eh?

I think of them like coydogs.