Sponsored Roles and Role Playing - Quality... what?

[Large Hero]

Laura makes an excellent point (this being my understanding of it): instances of a sponsored role 'not adhering to documentation' can be made into entertaining, conflict-rich examples of the documentation in effect (that may or may not end up with the sponsored role 'losing').

There are several parties involved and they're all responsible for different parts of the equation:

The catalyst: the sponsored role who wants to play counter to documentation.
Their responsibilities:
- understand they are playing counter to documentation
"My noble is having sexual relations with this elf/gemmed/mutant PC. I'm aware that this is abnormal and that my noble would be concerned and secretive about this, and would have a powerful internal response to it."

- develop and present this exceptional aspect of their character in a compelling, coherent way to other players and staff
"I need to render this relationship to anyone participating in or watching the scene, such that they understand it's an exceptional circumstance, and such that my character's unique motives and emotions are informing my RP."

- accept that there may be an IC backlash, and be willing to accept the consequences.
"If my noble gets caught having sex with this elf/gemmed/mutant, I understand that they may be killed, or the House may ensure they can't damage the family's reputation anymore (storage). I accept that staff may have to inflict these consequences on my PC."

or

"I didn't think I was going against documentation, but staff contacted me and we had a discussion about how
this behavior was an example of it. I have to accept that I won't get to play out this storyline exactly how I imagined it before. The virtual world will have a response to it if I continue and I'm discovered."

- remember that you signed up to play the embodiment of an example. When you signed up to play Lord Tor, you signed up to represent documented aspects of House Tor to the game and playerbase. If you didn't mention <documentation-breaking behavior> in your approved application, are you upholding your end of the bargain if the behavior prevents your character from being that example?

Sometimes, maybe it won't. Sometimes, maybe it will. All I'm saying is,  honestly ask yourself that question before you proceed.

- give staff the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to administrate the game in good faith for everyone's benefit

Staff:
- give the player the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to play the game and their role in good faith

- clearly communicate to the player that their choice is counter to documentation, and that it will have IC consequences if discovered

"Hey, player, we noticed that your noble PC has been having sexual relations with a elf/gemmed/mutant character. <discussion in which both parties talk about the documentation and how this situation relates>"

- once it's determined that the player understands how their choice fits into the documentation, allow the player to make their choice, and then apply a virtual response appropriate for the situation, in a compelling and coherent way

"This player has been informed about the consequences of their noble PC having sexual relations with a elf/gemmed/mutant character. They continued to do it, and were discovered. The House has learned of the sexual relations through IC means.

<staff executes a plot for the players involved, during which the virtual world asserts itself, perhaps to their peril>

Other players, especially those directly involved with the catalyst sponsored role:
- give the player the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to play the game and their role in good faith

- give staff the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to administrate the game in good faith for everyone's benefit

- react appropriately for your character, who is likely following documentation on the issue at hand

- be willing to weather the storm of consequences of the sponsored role's choices; if you're standing too close to them, you might get hurt.



If all of the above are followed, nobody feels shafted, and an engaging story has a good chance to result.

However, a caveat: consider how it could become tiresome if every other noble had sex with elf/gemmed/mutant characters, even if all the above were followed in each instance. The dramatic oomph is lessened. It becomes the Same Old Thing.

Further, if there are enough challenges to documentation, it eventually becomes unrepresentative of the game we're playing. This is usually a bad thing. The documentation is our setting.

When you're making the choice to be the exception to documentation, try to ensure it's going to increase the fun of yourself and those around you, and improve the game and our shared story. Which is not to say don't do it; just think about it, and think about how you're going to do it, before you do it.

[Dunetrade55]

To be honest when I played a sponsored role I got a lot of positive feedback, until I fucked up somewhere. I think they do, these days, provide a lot of positive reinforcement and encouragement, although, all I have is a single experience.

[Akaramu]

To be honest when I played a sponsored role I got a lot of positive feedback, until I fucked up somewhere. I think they do, these days, provide a lot of positive reinforcement and encouragement, although, all I have is a single experience.

Hmmm. My last sponsored role was like... in 2011 / 2012 or something. If this is more common now, awesome. 

[Dunetrade55]

To be honest when I played a sponsored role I got a lot of positive feedback, until I fucked up somewhere. I think they do, these days, provide a lot of positive reinforcement and encouragement, although, all I have is a single experience.

Hmmm. My last sponsored role was like... in 2011 / 2012 or something. If this is more common now, awesome. 

It was a totally great experience, the only problem is I'm a royal shit. You should try it again, staff are very different these days to how I remember them.

[deathkamon]

I know this may be sort of derailing to the topic at hand. If the Armageddon TeamSpeak is still up, and if the player and staff member in question have access to it, some sort of private chatroom could be made for a one on one chat on where said character should go. That way, instead of having to go through several stages of requests/notes/replies (A lot of stuff can get in the way regarding when those sorts of things can come in, and how soon), it could all be handled with a lot more ease and with better communication.

Just my two 'sids.

[Nergal]

For what it's worth, we've been pulling people up to talk with them one-on-one in a staff room about various things and we've had a lot of success with situations that would have otherwise had mixed results with just the the request tool. We definitely get the need for a more personal touch and things are swinging that way when it comes to certain things.

[Delirium]

Real-time chat in-game, yes, real-time chat out of game, no, video chat, no. Too many opportunities for weirdness with the latter two, not to mention I personally hate video chat (hearing impaired).

That's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.

[Malken]

Yeah, in-game real-time chat is as far as I'd be willing to go as well.

I don't want to have to communicate with any of you outside of the game.

[LauraMars]

this is a CRAZY suggestion, but maybe staff could just try to accommodate whatever method of communication both parties are the most comfortable with

(in other words, I don't think anyone is going to be forcing players to skype against their will, guys)

[Kalden]

If staff are concerned about weirdness such as 'breeds/gemmers and nobles having sex' - well, it seems like the game-world itself doesn't promote the discrimination as acutely as it could. So trying to enforce it through the sponsored roles might not be the lowest-hanging fruit.

For example, in Allanak, there is only one elf bar that I'm aware of - and it's in the Labyrinth, which is fairly dangerous. Granted, it seems like most city elves are 'rinthers.

The breeds, elves, and the gemmers all go to the Gaj, where it's not all that uncommon for normal humans/dwarves/half-giants to be outnumbered by those who are "outcasts".

The Magicker's Quarter kinda feels like the ritziest quarter in the game (outside of the noble and templarate quarter). Gemmed often have prestigious positions. So it's hard to regard them as feared and hated when they are clearly of high status and sort of welcomed in that sense.

The magick-using subguilds will also almost certainly make magick even more normal.

More efforts could be made to make the discrimination more acute by giving outcasts their own areas to hang out in, but that would come at the cost of the interaction, so it's not clear that it's all that worth it...

One idea would be to make all the merchants charge more to outcast types, or maybe even refuse service entirely in some cases? Or maybe some other disadvantages?

[Akaramu]

The Magicker's Quarter kinda feels like the ritziest quarter in the game (outside of the noble and templarate quarter). Gemmed often have prestigious positions. So it's hard to regard them as feared and hated when they are clearly of high status and sort of welcomed in that sense.

Is this really still the case? I thought that quarter got a big downgrade after the rioting mob passed through.

[Miradus]

The room descriptions sort of portray that there was a lot of damage done, but there's still a number of npc merchants who sell what would appear to the naked eye some ritzy bling.

There's also plants and someone watering them, which the rest of Nak doesn't really have and the absence of beggars and dessicated corpses in the streets makes it FEEL like Manhattan compared to the rest of the city.

[nauta]

I would like to see more echos re-enforcing the documentation in certain key places, e.g., gemmed being feared, elves being discriminated against.

That said: there is an elf bar southside (it's new) and some of the more luxurious things have been (recently) removed from the room descriptions in the Gemmed quarter.

[650Booger]

The breeds, elves, and the gemmers all go to the Gaj, where it's not all that uncommon for normal humans/dwarves/half-giants to be outnumbered by those who are "outcasts".

Don't elves make up like half the virtual population of allanak?  I don't see them as outcasts.

[Miradus]

There's definitely a sort of Elf Apartheid going on, regardless of their population.

[650Booger]

There's definitely a sort of Elf Apartheid going on, regardless of their population.

for sure.  I guess I was quibbling over the word 'outcasts'.  they are unequal, yes, but I don't think every elf should automatically be shunned by every human.  The races would be doing business together all the time.  elves definitely should feel welcome at the gaj, in my opinion.

breeds?  they should all be thrown into the nearest bonfire.

[Raptor_Dan]

If staff are concerned about weirdness such as 'breeds/gemmers and nobles having sex' -

When I brought this up as an example of 'going against documentation' I was using a quick, cheap, and effective example that might not necessarily hold up to scrutiny, but helped illustrate my point. I don't think this is exactly what staff are saying, and I feel like the other players used it as a "stand in" example too.

[Dunetrade55]

If staff are concerned about weirdness such as 'breeds/gemmers and nobles having sex' -

When I brought this up as an example of 'going against documentation' I was using a quick, cheap, and effective example that might not necessarily hold up to scrutiny, but helped illustrate my point. I don't think this is exactly what staff are saying, and I feel like the other players used it as a "stand in" example too.

I don't think my elves or breeds have ever been intimate with a noble... I know one of my elves was just fascinated with a Templar though. He hit on her, she said, thanks, but, it's not going to happen, how about you work for me? So yeah, it was tight after that even if the introduction was awkward. He took her ability to shrug it off as passing an extreme test of trust. He's like, well, if she can deal with this, then she's tougher than most of these roundear scum I meet.

... he actually did get jiggy with several roundears. It was funny because he knew how to pick them out, the most foul-mouthed necker-hater in the room is usually covering for some deep insecurity.

[Ath]

The breeds, elves, and the gemmers all go to the Gaj, where it's not all that uncommon for normal humans/dwarves/half-giants to be outnumbered by those who are "outcasts".

Don't elves make up like half the virtual population of allanak?  I don't see them as outcasts.

No, they do not.  I think it's around 25% at most, I cannot seem to find the docs we had on it.  Humans have the majority, elves are next up on that list though.  Half-elves are supposed to be considered rare because both races despise them, and their creation is supposed to also be very rare.  Either way, this is getting off topic.

As for the speaking with Staff, we like doing it in the game because all of it is recorded just in case something needs to be verified.

I think we're getting close to wrapping up on this topic.  I've been getting some positive feedback outside this thread, so I'm glad to hear you guys are liking these.  Thank you to Nergal for also dropping in also.  I have a few ideas for a couple more, so I might have a new one here soon.

I'll leave this open for questions along the lines of Sponsored Roles for a bit longer, you're welcome to ask as long as it doesn't got into IC details too heavily.

[Dunetrade55]

Wanted to thank staff for being open minded here... I know I have my more emotional moments, but it's absolutely great you all are really weighing this, considering, and tapping the playerbase for perspectives.

[Jingo]

*cough*

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,31655.25.html

This whole thread is pretty instructive. You want plots? Maybe stop bumping pcs back to chargen? So what if they they arn't 100% polite all the time or are possibly a threat in the extant future.

I see this as a pretty big problem at the moment resulting from a dearth of pc leadership. Nobody seems to know what to do except find players to kill who might sorta-one-day become a threat. And long lived characters seem more intent on maintaining their own sphere in the pc-centric non-virtual world of the game than try to interact with he world as a whole.

*cough*

[Fathi]

Laura makes an excellent point (this being my understanding of it): instances of a sponsored role 'not adhering to documentation' can be made into entertaining, conflict-rich examples of the documentation in effect (that may or may not end up with the sponsored role 'losing').

There are several parties involved and they're all responsible for different parts of the equation:

The catalyst: the sponsored role who wants to play counter to documentation.
Their responsibilities:
- understand they are playing counter to documentation
"My noble is having sexual relations with this elf/gemmed/mutant PC. I'm aware that this is abnormal and that my noble would be concerned and secretive about this, and would have a powerful internal response to it."

- develop and present this exceptional aspect of their character in a compelling, coherent way to other players and staff
"I need to render this relationship to anyone participating in or watching the scene, such that they understand it's an exceptional circumstance, and such that my character's unique motives and emotions are informing my RP."

- accept that there may be an IC backlash, and be willing to accept the consequences.
"If my noble gets caught having sex with this elf/gemmed/mutant, I understand that they may be killed, or the House may ensure they can't damage the family's reputation anymore (storage). I accept that staff may have to inflict these consequences on my PC."

or

"I didn't think I was going against documentation, but staff contacted me and we had a discussion about how
this behavior was an example of it. I have to accept that I won't get to play out this storyline exactly how I imagined it before. The virtual world will have a response to it if I continue and I'm discovered."

- remember that you signed up to play the embodiment of an example. When you signed up to play Lord Tor, you signed up to represent documented aspects of House Tor to the game and playerbase. If you didn't mention <documentation-breaking behavior> in your approved application, are you upholding your end of the bargain if the behavior prevents your character from being that example?

Sometimes, maybe it won't. Sometimes, maybe it will. All I'm saying is,  honestly ask yourself that question before you proceed.

- give staff the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to administrate the game in good faith for everyone's benefit

Staff:
- give the player the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to play the game and their role in good faith

- clearly communicate to the player that their choice is counter to documentation, and that it will have IC consequences if discovered

"Hey, player, we noticed that your noble PC has been having sexual relations with a elf/gemmed/mutant character. <discussion in which both parties talk about the documentation and how this situation relates>"

- once it's determined that the player understands how their choice fits into the documentation, allow the player to make their choice, and then apply a virtual response appropriate for the situation, in a compelling and coherent way

"This player has been informed about the consequences of their noble PC having sexual relations with a elf/gemmed/mutant character. They continued to do it, and were discovered. The House has learned of the sexual relations through IC means.

<staff executes a plot for the players involved, during which the virtual world asserts itself, perhaps to their peril>

Other players, especially those directly involved with the catalyst sponsored role:
- give the player the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to play the game and their role in good faith

- give staff the benefit of the doubt, that they're trying to administrate the game in good faith for everyone's benefit

- react appropriately for your character, who is likely following documentation on the issue at hand

- be willing to weather the storm of consequences of the sponsored role's choices; if you're standing too close to them, you might get hurt.



If all of the above are followed, nobody feels shafted, and an engaging story has a good chance to result.

However, a caveat: consider how it could become tiresome if every other noble had sex with elf/gemmed/mutant characters, even if all the above were followed in each instance. The dramatic oomph is lessened. It becomes the Same Old Thing.

Further, if there are enough challenges to documentation, it eventually becomes unrepresentative of the game we're playing. This is usually a bad thing. The documentation is our setting.

When you're making the choice to be the exception to documentation, try to ensure it's going to increase the fun of yourself and those around you, and improve the game and our shared story. Which is not to say don't do it; just think about it, and think about how you're going to do it, before you do it.

This should be stickied or something. Fantastic post.

I haven't played as many PCs as some people over the years because I've taken a couple breaks and my PCs tend to live for a while, but generally speaking when I communicate with staff in a way that resembles the above example, it's gone well. I played a character several years ago who was a feral child who raised themselves in the wilderness and I was very upfront with staff that she'd have issues with social norms and certain documentation things. She was bad with rules, etc. and overall it was a supremely snowflakey situation from the get-go because hey, someone utterly removed from society would not grok society very well.

But if I did something like that every character, I could see how that would get old, and as the post above says, become the same ol' same ol'.

One of the things I really loved about that feral character was just how many people went out of their way to try to teach her to be a functional citizen of the world. It was actually a great example of the documentation in action because every time someone would fight with her about "why the hell did you do ___" she got a chance to learn and by RPing it as ignorance rather than insisting I was right, there was an unspoken understanding between players that we were doing our best by the docs even if our characters weren't.

I think that last bit is the key. You can have a character who, for whatever reason, operates outside the usual social paradigm. If they're ignorant or rebellious that can be great!

When you're deliberately sidestepping the documentation, problems don't arise when characters insist they're right. Problems arise when players insist they're right. As long as players RP this stuff with an awareness that they're being an exception to the rule, it's usually worked out OK in my experience.

On the staff side of things, the post above mine also nails it. As a player (a player who even has some pretty contentious account notes from back in the day!), if a staff member approaches me and asks me questions about stuff in a non-accusatory way, I'm happy to have a dialogue about basically anything.

[Lutagar]

*cough*

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,31655.25.html

This whole thread is pretty instructive. You want plots? Maybe stop bumping pcs back to chargen? So what if they they arn't 100% polite all the time or are possibly a threat in the extant future.

I see this as a pretty big problem at the moment resulting from a dearth of pc leadership. Nobody seems to know what to do except find players to kill who might sorta-one-day become a threat. And long lived characters seem more intent on maintaining their own sphere in the pc-centric non-virtual world of the game than try to interact with he world as a whole.

*cough*

I've always seen the above as being more of a code limitation. The main problem is most PKs tend to result from an indefensible 'mon fuck you' or OHK backstab/arrow and you have know way of knowing when it's going to escalate to that stage.

He who strikes first wins and no one wants to lose their 10000000's of hours of time investment.

[Jingo]

*cough*

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,31655.25.html

This whole thread is pretty instructive. You want plots? Maybe stop bumping pcs back to chargen? So what if they they arn't 100% polite all the time or are possibly a threat in the extant future.

I see this as a pretty big problem at the moment resulting from a dearth of pc leadership. Nobody seems to know what to do except find players to kill who might sorta-one-day become a threat. And long lived characters seem more intent on maintaining their own sphere in the pc-centric non-virtual world of the game than try to interact with he world as a whole.

*cough*

I've always seen the above as being more of a code limitation. The main problem is most PKs tend to result from an indefensible 'mon fuck you' or OHK backstab/arrow and you have know way of knowing when it's going to escalate to that stage.

He who strikes first wins and no one wants to lose their 10000000's of hours of time investment.

I salivate over the thought of actually being assassinated. But every time I've been killed was because the player on the other side couldn't handle not winning (and/or not being a greasy twink about it).

[Lizzie]

*cough*

http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,31655.25.html

This whole thread is pretty instructive. You want plots? Maybe stop bumping pcs back to chargen? So what if they they arn't 100% polite all the time or are possibly a threat in the extant future.

I see this as a pretty big problem at the moment resulting from a dearth of pc leadership. Nobody seems to know what to do except find players to kill who might sorta-one-day become a threat. And long lived characters seem more intent on maintaining their own sphere in the pc-centric non-virtual world of the game than try to interact with he world as a whole.

*cough*

Killing people *creates* plots just as much as it ends them. Without naming specific situations or characters:

I have counted four characters in particular, that my PC or people my PC knew wanted to kill. With these particular 4 "enemies" (we'll use that term just to identify who we're talking about), people decided not to kill them for a variety of reasons:

1) they're so stupid they'll end up killing themselves anyway.
2) let the other guy kill them, why risk my own ass when someone else is eager to get the job done?
3) he's not important enough to kill, it won't be any big deal if he lives.

In each of these four particular cases, the enemy in question was not killed when it was easy to kill them.  One character "not killed" ended up ruining 5 different plotlines. And went on to become incredibly influential, even though no one could stand them and dozens of people wanted him dead. But everyone kept saying "oh - he's a dipshit, he can't hurt anything" or "yeah everyone else wants him dead, he'll end up dead anyway, don't bother." And then there was the OOC "consideration" to not PK just because you can't stand someone. People went out of their way to come up with reasons to NOT kill this person, until this person systematically ruined several plotlines over the course of over a RL year. Many OTHER characters were killed as either a direct or indirect result of this "enemy" character -

and by the time people finally realized someone had to get off the shitter and DO something about it, this person was considered "hands off" by the "IC powers that be" and was politically untouchable.

This happened with four "enemy" characters I can think of, in the last decade.

So I say - if you think someone should be killed, and you discover other people think this person should be killed, someone should kill them. Because you leave it to everyone else, or dismiss it as unimportant, you'll end up with dead plots instead of a dead PC.