Nanapariri

I have a Dreams in Vanadiel account should I post there?

I've been sending out a few a day, since that's what I have time for, but so far all I've gotten is a few maybes. I also think people don't feel its "urgent" since the game isn't even out yet.

Hi Zarik I was just wondering if you only wanted us to contact former Rpers via E-mail/message only about here at this time or if we should post any info on any boards just yet? Is there a game plan in place so that you'd only perfer certain contacts at certain kinds of contacts in different stages?

I think it depends on what a group will allow. I briefly wanted my villian character to be trying to become a necromancer as part of a sotryline for my LS. I only was OK with it myself since I figured I'd have input from the other LS leaders and she'd be acting more like an NPC for the storyline in this capacity. After talking it through we decided that it would be overpowered and chose another option for it that wouldn't seem over powered and the LS wouldn't misunderstand as us getting away.

Hi- Sorry I've been extraordinaryily busy in r/l lately and it might not let up anytime soon (family stuff going on on top of working 2 jobs and caring for my parents). So I may not be posting often. Anyway I think it sounds like next week would be good for most people so I'd go with that. Premilinary rules/guidelines seem good. I think the process for removal could use a little more ironing out though.

HBL RP nights and my LSes RP Night which is open to friends not in our LS are both done in say. Like Mason says the location serves as the draw to come and RP. I agree with KS too many linkpearls would cause problems.

When I was on Starsider I was in a guild called House Blue Lotus that was sort of that idea. We hosted a social open to all on Friday nights which was very popular while HBL's leaders were around. When a lot of us stopped playing it stopped. Maybe I should try some themed RP night like that like I do for Sfant Umbra in some kind of organization. lol

Hmm.. While I've never experience something like this I'll give what I have seen and some thoughts. SWG- Starsider had a separate Rebel and Imperial board in addition to the main one, and they did use them to do some Imperial Events or Rebel Events, also they did on occasion make "factional" type events of criminals vs Imperials or rebels vs Imperials. Also they attempted to get bounty hunters bounties to chase on a limited basis. They never were organized or kept RP of this king going for long. Seeing as your expereince saw ebbs etc I'd say if this was part of RPC struture and a way for the RPC itself to put on events for its members maybe it could work. If these groups were run by the RPC, if someone left, they would elect or choose someone to take their place. If this was done I'd say make them Discipline Based Groups. That way guilds of several types could interact under that banner. Rivalries and alliances between disciplines could be controlled also so as to not get out of hand. Just an idea or two, I'm not sure what else I could add.

I like the rewording I think it addresses all of our concerns and is very clear.

The heirarchy as you wrote it, and the way to handle disputes, I think is well done. What I"m saying is that in order to make sure the RPC isn't pulled into stupid disputes that aren't really affecting the whole group you should word that section more clearly. Like the RPC saying only griefing, chronic god-modding or harrasment are issues that affect the whole community and will be dealt with on that level. If you leave it ambigious you'll have to decide on anything they bring that is at issue. Like in my above example a dispute betwwen 2 guilds can be over something petty that neither side can agree one but how would a guild name negatively affect the entire RPC Community. The two guilds can agree to disagree and just drop it and as long as it doesn't escalate to the degree of harassment why would the RPC have to intervene? Just make it clear unless its one of the things ruled against the "charter" its not a big enough deal for the RPC to get involved.

I pretty much agree with Keir and Ty on not being 100% comfortable with the intervention but maybe if its worded more like its a service than a command. Like: If two guilds are in disagreement and request the Council to mediate the dispute. If they choose to use this service they must agree to follow the decision of the RPC. Kind of like saying wer're here to help if needed but we aren't trying to be Big Brother.

In support of this idea, maybe Castiel should create a section of the RPC forums whereby each guild's leader(s) can post their rules, policies, guidelines, views, whatever. Then when an event is posted, or even if an event randomly comes together*, there is a central hub where those rules may be reviewed or referenced. This would certainly help avoid any confusion, ease tensions, and be conducive to better cross-guild relations. * During the random ones there may need to be some agreement on whose rules should be followed. I would think that even random events would normally be the result of an individual or small group of RPers that could make this distinction early in case any issues arose. Just covering all the bases. /endfootnote I support both of these ideas. Well said. This is a good idea.

The great thing in this world is not so much where we stand, as in what direction we are moving. - Oliver Wendell Holmes I find it encouraging though everyone speaks their mind the discussion has all been reasonable and we are able to see each others views, though we might misunderstand at times, and in the end come out understanding despite challenges. The fact we can recognize that most of us are on the same page now in a lot of ways I think shows we are moving in a direction that is able to form a community despite differences.

Then we do agree I just have a bad memory. lol. Sorry if I seem like I"m scolding. Now that its cleared up I'm stopping posting for awhile. :lol: Edit: I'll be John Hancock. I just want to give input while we discuss and be the first to sign the thing once its done lol.

Edit to add: and this: My bad... I didn't think you were serious about that statement. Though I did address it, but evidently not clearly enough: We absolutely can control who uses this forum and who is a member of the community by banning them. We have control but not absolute god-like control. I mean those to be questions to think about as to what we can control as being what our focus is on. You seemed to be saying we have control over nothing. EDIT: Also I wasn't directly meaning your post on a couple of those just most of what I used was based on your post. The Ang was because I think Kes and some other seem to feel we should limit membership with the same sort of criteria a guild would trying to make the whole community have the same RP style in effect. I'm saying why worry about small things like that. The other thing I was trying to say is having a guild deal with some things and using the system SE has in place are vailid ways to deal with big issues.

This seemed to me to mean there are other punishable offences than those in the TOS that the RPC must deal with and we need to be able to punish people that disagree with us. My point was is not all disagreements are so dire we have to deal with it and we won't be able to stop people's behavior in other forums and IG if they do.

Ok one more post: I mean the exact opposite that you do Dogberry. Think about the following questions: 1) Will one isolated guy pretending to be Ang from Avataar destroy the entire RP community? Cause people to leave the game? Post on Alla "I can't believe those people on Cid server tolerate that terrible behavior"? Isn't it only a minor annoyance in comaprison to rampant god-modding? 2) Name one large issue that is not in the TOS that will cause a massive exodus and discontent. The TOS covers major issues like harrasment in game so how can we do better in stopping harrassment in game than a GM that can suspend them? 3) What is the only thing the RPC would have direct control of to use as a diciplinary measure? Isn't it membership in the RPC and the Board? If we expell someone from the RPC can that stop them from harrasing members in game? If we can't suspend people from the game how isn't telling a GM that can or /blacklisting them not a valid way to control the only thing we can? Basically I'm just saying only make rules you can actually enforce that actually will harm or damage a person's expereince in game. Concentrate on those things just in case rather than allowing or not allowing other RP styles. Honestly I think believing we can control or stop more than is possible to within our power than we actually can would be more "getting to big for our britches" than leaving some things for a Guild or SE to deal with.

Thanks guys for clearing that up for me. I can see really most of us have the same basic idea really. Cast: If you feel I've posted too much I'll stop for awhile after this post. When you guys mention a fear its a good measure of if the fear is valid or not to see if that sort of thing has happened in a community similiar to what you want to try out. I'm just asking you guys to consider examples of things more similiar. I see a good chunk of folks who seem to think that just because FF is part of the name of this new game their experience will be exactly the same as their server on FFXI. At the most, in FFXI, I think most of us only had maybe 3 other RP Guilds at any given time that lasted any length of time and hardly had anything to do with eachother so comparing what we want to do here, which my understanding is we want more than 3 Guilds all working together, isn't that effective. I'm concerened that is seems the over-all feeling of many here seem to feel that its impossible for the RPC to succeed. People will just be running around god-modding and being immature. You yourself Cast have said in more than one place that the coalition won't last a year which is a terrible mind-set to have going into a project like this. To me comparing the FFXI community to a large coalition is like comparing apples to oranges. I have done some cross-guild things on FFXI just as it seems some of you have, but in no way do I think that a few isolated insisdences is a good measuring stick to construct a charter for a large community. Comparing a community like Starsider to what the goal of the RPC has is like comparing a mandarin orange to a florida orange. I'm just concerned that some people seem unwilling to accept anything other than their own experience in one server on one game while discrediting statements made regarding other games (SWG and WOW) that have had successful much larger communites. I'm seeing remarks to the effect that "well that group was too lenient for the people I know will be playing FFXIV since only people from FFXI will be there forming our community and they are all immature god-modders". Don't expect this since it is a different game and some people that play FFXI may not like or play it. Some people from that WOW community or Starsider could even try it so constructing a community that only FFXI Rpers would like is equally bad. Starsider was a united community of upwards of 15 guilds going all at once plus some freelancers with no guild. Looking at what they've implemented that has worked, as well as that EQ group and Thraydon's experience in WOW, and seeing that a large group is able to deal with the problems that can and will happen without needing some huge list of rules proves a large and healthly RPC is possible. Everyone here seems convinced the RPC will be small or will fall apart. SWG and WOW are both very different communities but Thraydon has expressed some of the exact same expereinces I have. There are only probably 70-100 Rpers in SWG so its not a big and large group as I think you all believe and I don't know how many are in WOW. If two entirely different games have had a similiar experience then I think its safe to view those similairties as what is average for a large RP Community. I'm not expecting the RPC to be just like Starsider I'm just relating information that I feel is valid for consideration. I'm also not expecting RPC to be just like FFXI. Like you said it will be its own community. Everyone should keep that in mind and not dwell on FFXI so much. On fears that too much freedom gives free-reign to god-moders: I'm with you on over the top things but I have RPed with people like that, and despite the weird issue (let's say blue skin) they were nice people, surprisingly mature, and I had fun. There were those people on Starsider but people were mature enough to just not RP with people who do things we don't like. There might be a place here for those people, I know on Starsider there were 2 guilds that were way out there as far as the community was concerned, and they often felt the rest of us were being "elistist" but we still managed to get along. They came to the events but didn't do anything there they knew would prevent others from enjoying it. Though I personally don't generally like those things if we try to make standards for a community that exclude certain characters we would be taking a bad step for creating a community with a good reputation that others want to join. Those preferences should be left to personal preferences "on a citizens type post" or rules for a private guild. I did "Jedi RP" while on Starsider that had a bad name because of a few god-modders etc and canon Nazi feeling even a small group hiding wasn't time appropriate. Those people avoided us, or in many cases we were so good at hiding, had no idea we were a Lightside Guild. My point in relating this is just because some idiots try to justify using an excuse to god-mod or Mary Sue don't think the majority of people will. In my experience these people slit their own throats and leave of their own free will when they alienate everyone else by their actions so there is no need to try and keep them out. I think this would be a good idea, and way to summarize what we've all talked about and the different points of view we can bring to the table for consideration. I also think this is the intelligent way to go. Making a bunch of rules because of issues that we fear might happen based on experience up front is a bit like the woman whose teenage daughter ran away from home so she chained her other two children to their beds in their rooms. I remember in the news when the woman was asked why she said she didn't want the other kids running away like the first one. Please lets not imprison the RPC folks because of a few jerks we've met in the past. The whole reason for setting standards and having a body that regularly meets is so that adjustments can be made to meet the needs of the RPC going forward. Start out expecting the best and ammend the rules based on actual real happenings not feared possible future happenings. Start with some basic things and only add other things if needed.

I think really what he means, and at least what I mean is, we don't want so many rules that people won't cross-guild RP for fear of breaking rules. I might be taking this wrong, but I sort of had that feeling you feel spontaenous unplanned RP without events shouldn't happen If there are guilds/LS. On Starsider I belonged to a guild with rules and structure but I also Rped with people from other guilds and free lancer just because they were at an RP hub. A RP hub was a place that a lot of Rpers hung out at when they were bored. Some of the most fun I had in SWG RP was from unplanned spontaenous RPs with people I just met. If I'd have been worried that by interacting with that person I might break some rule and be kicked out I would' ve missed out on meeting people that later became friends. I'd hoped that cross guild RP in this RPC and server would encourage random and spontaneous interaction as well as event based. I'm getting the feeling the reason you all want rules for battle and all cross-guild actions is because you are not in favor of being spontaenous feeling it will only create drama. Am I right? I hope I'm not since I really hoped people could have fun with random encounters as well as events.

QFW It pretty much summarizes the way I feel. Though I personally don't think a "Rule Set" of how and when a person has to handle battle I could see it posted as a suggested way to handle the situation if they can't decide how to handle it themselves. If you try to make it a rule it would be next to impossible to enforce because it happens so often you'll be dealing with it during time you could spend on thing more beneficial for the group. If you insist on making it a standard that has to "kick in" without question it will not go over very well. Basically if you say "in order to prevent problems when you can't decide how to handle an IC conflict we offer the following endorsed RPC suggestion." This way you aren't obligated to step in and discipline anyone. I think a simple mission statement as to how we should view the "public" and be friendly and open should suffice on that.

I love this quote Cast you aren't talking about only ettiquette when you are talking about making a standard set of rules for battle. I'm saying that we should only have players agree to etiquette in terms of treatment of eachother and how to deal with troublemakers. Then The RPC will rarely have to do anything drastic. If you get into "how to conduct a battle" or things like that you are stepping on the toes of people. Ettiquette should matter no matter how large or small, how many guilds are envolved so "when the RPC standards kick-in" isn't an issue. No one should ever treat anyone like that whether its in a guild or between different guilds.