Forum Links 

Click to return to main page
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in 
 Current Top Five Rated Killers 
 Next Event   Voting Links 








What's the logic behind evil Justices?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Abandoned Realms Forum Index -> Roleplaying
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Vhrael
Immortal


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 928
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:45 pm    Post subject:

Mandor wrote:
the first part would actually be against the rules because it'll fall under the umbrella of "inviting chaos into seringale" and being against the gods of order.

Yeah, um... I know that. I wasn't saying I was encouraging it, I said I was intrigued by the concept/idea of it. The problem is that game mechanics ("inviting chaos into seringale" = against Justice guidelines) don't allow it as an RP option.

The deal is, with evil Justices they have to be viewed as individuals who view their ethos (lawful) as more important than their alignment (evil). If they were neutral evil or chaotic evil, they'd probably either be uncaballed or join Legion. Because they're so driven by their ethos (lawful), they feel compelled to hold others to the law via becoming a Justice.

That's the big reason that the "corrupt" (charging for protection, etc.) get booted in the current guidelines system. If you're viewed as corrupt, you don't belong. Same goes with peace officers currently; there's an Internal Affairs division that'll investigate and punish those who break the rules (helping prisoners get away with things they shouldn't, abusing their power over innocent people, extortion, etc.).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
 
0 0 0
Mandor



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 801

PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:08 pm    Post subject:

well like I said, the whole god appointed bullseye via knights onto evil justices kind of makes the whole "bring chaos into seringale" point supersede any good a lawful evil may do.

so either the terms and stipulations, the outline of the game's mechanics and policy regarding this is archaic and needs to be redesigned, or evils have been breaking the point of it this whole time and need to finally be shut down.

Additionally, the law is so simplistic that there isn't room for evil. Suppose a justice could remove a flag if the perpetrator made a mistake in attacking, among other things. That could be well in the realm of neutral justice behavior, after all if it is a mistake, helping out the guy instead of punishing them would decrease animosity instead of help it grow. animosity is what causes chaos via attacks. However, a lawful evil would thoroughly punish, even in the case of a mistake. evils that are lawful have codes and follow rules, their own and others, if they belong to a group that has such rules. but they dont care about life, protecting the weak, and so on. Now, if a justice could ask for gold outside of seringale to protect people outside of seringale, that would be a good start to getting some evil justices some nasty side business.

Devils are lawful evil beings, demons chaotic evil. realistically, people that adhere to every single part of their cabal rules, respect the authority, and fight with honor, but adhere to their alignment's attitude towards enemies, life, and other general stuff, those would actually be lawful versions of their respective alignment, but can this game really handle that kind of alignment realism? a lawful legion, for example, would never kill their superiors to try to get ranks, nor even attack their equals, but definitely bully and maybe kill the lessers, and would follow the codes of legion strictly without fail. at least, when talking about the general idea of lawful. so lawful and the rest of the alignments must mean something else in this game. Now Im getting confuzzled.
_________________
that's another issue with the "elite emissary forum". people outside can't see whats being discussed and learn the intimate details of the game whereby they could understand things better for their own ideas. stifling group learning. yum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Vhrael
Immortal


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 928
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:44 pm    Post subject:

Mandor wrote:
well like I said, the whole god appointed bullseye via knights onto evil justices kind of makes the whole "bring chaos into seringale" point supersede any good a lawful evil may do.

so either the terms and stipulations, the outline of the game's mechanics and policy regarding this is archaic and needs to be redesigned, or evils have been breaking the point of it this whole time and need to finally be shut down.

You're talking about "breaking guidelines through CONSCIOUS EFFORT" versus "breaking guidelines because of SOMEONE ELSE'S INTERPRETATION OF WHO THE EVIL JUSTICE IS."

Conscious effort = stirring shit out of town which causes chaos to come to town (protection money, cabal intrusions, etc.).
Someone else's views = Knights' view ("He's evil, so we must purify/invade.")

To that end you could say that Knights break Valour code by causing evils/Legion to come to Valour and invade the Castle or attack people in Valour. So when we ban evils from Justice, we'll go ahead and ban good-aligned from joining Knights too.

Hell, you can also say that any Justices, Knights or Legion wearing too many rares/gambled items cause cabal invasions by their equipment wearing (a conscious decision), so let's ban that from all cabals too.

"Conscious effort" actions aren't acceptable because they are deliberate attempts to circumvent or break (without getting caught) the guidelines. These are controllable and will be dealt with accordingly.

Chaos caused by someone else's view of a character based on alignment/ethos/equipment/etc. (Knights wanting to purify, Keepers keeping balance, etc.) and not that character's actions is not IMHO the 'fault' of the character. If the character is trying to extort, invading, etc. then that's a different story, but again that's ACTIONS versus the way the character's built.

I don't know really how to put into words at this moment why evil Justices should be/are allowed (besides what's already been said), but I know what I feel. If you don't think they should be because of some game dynamic reason, then bring it up to Davairus.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
 
0 0 0
Mandor



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 801

PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:17 pm    Post subject:

actually I would like evils to be capable of extortion and such. it just seems like evil is forced to be neutral when in justice.
_________________
that's another issue with the "elite emissary forum". people outside can't see whats being discussed and learn the intimate details of the game whereby they could understand things better for their own ideas. stifling group learning. yum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
_Clifton_
Emissary


Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 1432
Location: your and you're are not the same. they're, there, and their are not the same. learn to english.

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:54 am    Post subject:

justices can still kill everything that moves. just not in town. and it can't appear that the law is corrupt.
_________________
just because you're allowed to talk, doesn't mean you should. obviously this doesn't apply to me because i'm not you. i'm me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Vhrael
Immortal


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 928
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 4:40 pm    Post subject:

Mandor wrote:
actually I would like evils to be capable of extortion and such.

Let me try again to break this down for you...

Say we allow extortion, turning a "blind eye" to attacks in town, other methods of "shady" (evil) Justice behavior, etc. We're now affecting the game mechanics for other players. The ones who are OOC or even IC with the Justice(s) in question know that they can expect different treatment from said Justice(s) because they're breaking guidelines, but the other majority of players/characters (especially newbies) who don't know that said Justice(s) are corrupt start complaining about discriminating Justices, corruption, etc. and ask for the players/characters to be booted.

See, other players rely on the Justice/law system as a means of defense among other things. If you see a Justice on, especially now that they can't go invis, you know that if you need protection you can run to town and squat. You might still get attacked, but at least there's the threat of a WANTED flag that someone's staring in the face if they want to risk it. If you take that away then you're affecting others' gameplay because of a "roleplay" tool. We can't have that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
 
0 0 0
Mandor



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 801

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:17 pm    Post subject:

Vhrael wrote:
Mandor wrote:
actually I would like evils to be capable of extortion and such.

Let me try again to break this down for you...

Say we allow extortion, turning a "blind eye" to attacks in town, other methods of "shady" (evil) Justice behavior, etc. We're now affecting the game mechanics for other players. The ones who are OOC or even IC with the Justice(s) in question know that they can expect different treatment from said Justice(s) because they're breaking guidelines, but the other majority of players/characters (especially newbies) who don't know that said Justice(s) are corrupt start complaining about discriminating Justices, corruption, etc. and ask for the players/characters to be booted.

See, other players rely on the Justice/law system as a means of defense among other things. If you see a Justice on, especially now that they can't go invis, you know that if you need protection you can run to town and squat. You might still get attacked, but at least there's the threat of a WANTED flag that someone's staring in the face if they want to risk it. If you take that away then you're affecting others' gameplay because of a "roleplay" tool. We can't have that.


newbies dont know or feel some overbearing importance to the number of deaths they have. the only people that rage about getting cabal members booted are malignant whiny types who actually know the game.

maybe its a communication problem. If you say "this is how it is" and then theres a contradiction, thats where people get upset. If you say "this is how it usually is, or mostly is, most of the time", then people cant complain and will have to seek other avenues of revenge.

BUt I wasn't really looking for "looking the other way while someone attacks in town". A lawful who's part of the actual law in D&D probably wouldn't do it either. But they would extort money or refuse to protect you. its a knife edge difference, but worth noting.


Realistically, even the game mechanics are theoretical things. its the language of the helpfiles and such that says "IT is this way and only this way, and people who don't do it this way are breaking game rules that they can be removed from the game". That is a created game mechanic that is taking behavior and consequences out of the game world and putting it in the player world, two different things. that could be changed.

anyway, even when not breaking actual rules, like Deminos, people still seem to get in trouble because it can be rules lawyered that they're bringing chaos into town. So if the rules change, or the statements are written so that such an interpretation isnt possible anymore, then no more problem. Problems are imagined, and problems arise when the perception of what is fails to coincide with the notions or beliefs of what should be.
_________________
that's another issue with the "elite emissary forum". people outside can't see whats being discussed and learn the intimate details of the game whereby they could understand things better for their own ideas. stifling group learning. yum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Vhrael
Immortal


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 928
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:45 pm    Post subject:

Mandor wrote:
newbies dont know or feel some overbearing importance to the number of deaths they have. the only people that rage about getting cabal members booted are malignant whiny types who actually know the game.

If we get new players (whether they have mud experience or not) and they learn what [JUSTICE] means, and they realize they got screwed over and died/lost items because a Justice was "roleplaying a corrupt guy," they will complain and leave. "Veteran" players will complain, and when their complaints don't result in the immediate deny+siteban of the offending Justice/player, they'll nerdrage and post an "I quit (for the next 2 weeks)" thread on the forum.

Mandor wrote:
maybe its a communication problem. If you say "this is how it is" and then theres a contradiction, thats where people get upset. If you say "this is how it usually is, or mostly is, most of the time", then people cant complain and will have to seek other avenues of revenge.

So you're saying that we should change the helpfiles/Justice guidelines to "Most of the time you can rely on the Justices to uphold the law" instead of what it currently is? Then we'd get every Justice half-assing it just for the special guard and town protection. They'd all be evil, and there wouldn't be any motivation to play a true, stand-up lawful Justice.

Mandor wrote:
BUt I wasn't really looking for "looking the other way while someone attacks in town". A lawful who's part of the actual law in D&D probably wouldn't do it either. But they would extort money or refuse to protect you. its a knife edge difference, but worth noting.

I think the big distinction here is "lawful" as an ethos (believing in a code of conduct/set of rules, etc.) and "lawful" meaning following the law. A soldier in the Army may be "lawful" (believes in the UCMJ, follows the chain of command, knows right from wrong, etc.) but might not be LAWFUL to the SAME DEGREE as an MP (military police), who not only believes in the same code but also enforces it. If the soldier breaks the law, he gets punished. If the MP fails to ENFORCE the law, then he gets punished as well as likely booted from his position as an MP.

Mandor wrote:
Realistically, even the game mechanics are theoretical things. its the language of the helpfiles and such that says "IT is this way and only this way, and people who don't do it this way are breaking game rules that they can be removed from the game". That is a created game mechanic that is taking behavior and consequences out of the game world and putting it in the player world, two different things. that could be changed.

Game mechanics are theoretical things, ideas that we (the players) adhere to as a group. If they're deemed unnecessary, unfair, unbalanced, or simply undesired by the whole (and approved by the game owner, implementors, etc.) then they're changed.

That being said, helpfiles and guidelines for cabals and roleplay HAVE ALWAYS BEEN part of the player world. If you (the player) break the guidelines/game mechanics, then you're punished - it's that simple.

Mandor wrote:
anyway, even when not breaking actual rules, like Deminos, people still seem to get in trouble because it can be rules lawyered that they're bringing chaos into town. So if the rules change, or the statements are written so that such an interpretation isnt possible anymore, then no more problem. Problems are imagined, and problems arise when the perception of what is fails to coincide with the notions or beliefs of what should be.

There are proper channels for addressing problems with players/characters breaking the guidelines/game mechanics established, especially for Justice. COMPLAINTS or NOTES are a big and obvious one. Ragedelete + complaining in the Graveyard isn't the way to get anything done, because typically not much constructive dialogue takes place that way.

I really don't know that there's a reason *FOR* changing the rules, guidelines or helpfiles like you're talking about. I don't see a reason for it, and nobody's really bothered or attempted to build a reasonable case for why it should be done.

Unless there's something else in this discussion I'm missing, I'm going to consider it closed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
 
0 0 0
Mandor



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 801

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:30 pm    Post subject:

I don't recall being punished for the game mechanic of pking someone, but okay.. game mechanics don't always have to equal player punishment.

you play a certain way because you're motivated to roleplay that way. at least, thats what I remember from my continuing playing d&d.

Its just a shame that cabal mandates are not dealt with In Character. eh, oh well.
_________________
that's another issue with the "elite emissary forum". people outside can't see whats being discussed and learn the intimate details of the game whereby they could understand things better for their own ideas. stifling group learning. yum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Vhrael
Immortal


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 928
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:41 pm    Post subject:

Mandor wrote:
thats what I remember from my continuing playing d&d.

I started blanking out on the rest of your post, but AR is not D&D. I've played both for years, and AR is its own game, own world, etc.

It's not D&D, not AD&D, not D&D 3rd Edition. It's Abandoned Realms.

Lawful doesn't mean the same thing in AR as it does in D&D. It won't, and it's the way it is because it's the way the game designers/implementors wanted it to be. If you can come up with a valid reason it should be different that's not "because it's like that in D&D" then, by all means...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
 
0 0 0
Mandor



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 801

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:36 pm    Post subject:

I thought I'd already said that. but my point was that you said people wouldnt be motivated to play a certain way, but I cited experience where people are motivated to play a certain way exactly because there's the freedom to be any way but they think "this seems interesting and not done to death". I've done unaligned paladins for the god of civilization and law before, precisely because of that. It was very judge dredd feeling, going out into the wastes to bring law to them.
_________________
that's another issue with the "elite emissary forum". people outside can't see whats being discussed and learn the intimate details of the game whereby they could understand things better for their own ideas. stifling group learning. yum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Abandoned Realms Forum Index -> Roleplaying All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group