1

[LiadansWhisper]

As for being a fugitive, if that's the logical path for a particular story to take, fine. It's not something I'd want  arbitrarily imposed upon my character by someone else.

 

I'm not sure one would call it arbitrary if the story went down a path of "law person overheard what was construed as criminal conspiracy and decided to take action". That's just reasonable. Arbitrary would be more "I was just standing here and some Blade/Flame/whatever (ooc: yes, I know the difference - that the person in question might not have is another topic entirely) came up and randomly arrested me!"

 

Sure.  But...from the description, I'm not sure how the person interpreted it as that.  Since one character was turning himself into another character (who actually had the authority to take him into custody), and a third character - apparently overhearing the conversation - buts in and decides that he/she will take them both into custody.  I know it didn't really come up, but the Flame didn't have the authority to arrest anyone, much less a Sultansworn. o_O

[Ilwe'ran]

It's an uncool situation you got into Natalie.

 

I will not repeat what the other people said about respect and talking OOCly with people that interfere in YOUR plot while they have nothing to do with it.

I completly agree that anything looking like slavery, rape, death, captivity have to be accepted beforehand by the victim.

People talked a lot about surprise and I do some surprises as well. But with my partner only because I know him, I know what he wouldn't like and I can respect his character even if I sometimes push him onto some limits (beside, we talk OOCly, checking if everything is alright).

I don't agree with the idea that you should RP in party when you're RPing something "sensible" (unless ERP of course). Before interfering on some sensible situation (like what happened to you yesterday), people outside the plot should think five minutes to consider the consequences for the one they will RP with. I can understand the fact he wanted to fit to his character, but sometimes, to not destroy some other RPer pleasure, better act as if you didn't read anything.

 

Beside, if at any point, any moment, you feel uncomfortable or forced to something. You HAVE to stop the situation OOCly and not waiting a point you cannot stand it anymore. And if the one that RP with you doesn't listen to you, it just means that it's time for you to go away and ignore that person that doesn't respect you as a RPer and only want some selfish RP pleasure.

 

Never ignore your own feelings. That's the most important and even if you end to scratch someone else pride, you have to say when you're not feeling good IRL about some IC situation. It's RP, it's suppose to be fun, not something you have to endure.

[Clover]

(Sorry if my reply is strange at this point. I've only read the first two pages ;_; )

 

I tend to go with the flow when I RP. To me, it's actually interesting to see the huge turns RP can take, and how heavily it can influence your story.

 

This said, I know that not everyone enjoys losing all control over their own story, and to be fair, not all outcomes are pleasant even for me. So I believe that asking permission for important things would prevent future headaches.

 

I have a personal example from GW2. I played a girl who was in position to arrest some thieves. However, I whispered them asking them to help me find a reasonable excuse for my character not to arrest them, unless they were okay playing an arrest scene (I didn't mind which so long as it made sense). In case they wouldn't cooperate with making the story reasonable, I'd have simply walked away imagining that the scene didn't happen. You can't force an arrest to others, but others can't force you to be OOC either. A mutual agreement is necessary or things won't work.

[Naunet]

Sure.  But...from the description, I'm not sure how the person interpreted it as that.  Since one character was turning himself into another character (who actually had the authority to take him into custody), and a third character - apparently overhearing the conversation - buts in and decides that he/she will take them both into custody.  I know it didn't really come up, but the Flame didn't have the authority to arrest anyone, much less a Sultansworn. o_O

 

It could easily be played as an IC misunderstanding, wherein the soldier in question (again, ignoring the fact that Immortal Flames don't really have law enforcement power - that's a specific detail that's unnecessary when generalizing out the situation) perceived the man turning himself in as actually the man conspiring with the woman. Sultansworn certainly aren't immune to corruption, after all, and how is one to tell the difference between "I'm telling this person my plans because I'm turning myself in" and "I'm telling this person my plans because I'm hoping for their help" when you just overhear some words? Easy resolution would have been that, after being taken to the jail for booking, the Sultansworn could have explained the whole situation. They would've then had to wrestle with the choice of actually turning in their friend in the interest of preserving their own image or not. The former might have gotten said friend medical help, though, as certainly the Blades wouldn't have wanted to leave a criminal laying on the street; as soon as the Sultansworn gave them the what's what, they could've gone off to pick him up.

[Renault Delumiere]

:tonberry: This is tommy the tonberry

 

Tommy the tonberry stabs this thread.

 

This thread has 0hp

 

This thread has died.

 

Do not keep beating the dead thread.

 

Let the damn thread die.

 

And all the beautiful people lived happily ever after.

[LiadansWhisper]

:tonberry: This is tommy the tonberry

 

Tommy the tonberry stabs this thread.

 

This thread has 0hp

 

This thread has died.

 

Do not keep beating the dead thread.

 

Let the damn thread die.

 

And all the beautiful people lived happily ever after.

 

I Stoneskinned this thread.  

 

Don't make me come over there with my stick.

[Naunet]

Stuff about tonberries and beating dead ones

 

That's a bit unfair. So I don't get to participate in engaging conversation? >_>

[Clover]

:tonberry: This is tommy the tonberry

 

Tommy the tonberry stabs this thread.

 

This thread has 0hp

 

This thread has died.

 

Do not keep beating the dead thread.

 

Let the damn thread die.

 

And all the beautiful people lived happily ever after.

I'm very sorry for participating in a thread. I'll try to avoid it in the future @_@ (?)

[111]

I think this thread ended up having some really good discussions, and allowed a lot of people to express their viewpoints. It was really informative to me especially. I would say feel free to continue to discuss anything that was brought up, but as I said before, it would be good to speak in generalities, rather than nitpick my rather specific situation.

[Aldotsk]

Without a doubt, this thread has been very essential and helpful for everyone to share their opinions and clarify things a bit better. In every roleplays, characters always seem to just think that everyone will exactly have the same thoughts as others, and that's the biggest problem there. Talk it out and negotiate. We are all here to have fun, and it'd be just terrible to endure such drama and break friendships with others.

 

Sure there are some players who don't appreciate your IC intervention, and if they don't appreciate it and they tell you to stay out of it, then it's probably best to just not be involved at all. Why create a drama about it really? 

 

Also any cops style character should not just go off and make an arrest without knowing full stories. :U

 

C'mon. Even Natalie has a notebook she carries around to write full stories when she investigates.

 

(except she hasn't been doing that lately.)

[TheLastCandle]

Tommy the tonberry should put down the knife and let the mods do their job where they feel it's warranted. This has been a good, civil discussion and has been quite helpful.

[FreelanceWizard]

It's a total sidebar here, but anyone is certainly welcome to report a thread or post via PM or the little report button if they think it's out of line. That doesn't necessarily mean anything will be done, but it's certainly more likely to get results than posting in the thread asking people to stop posting.

 

This particular thread has been great, IMO. It's been a very civil discussion on a fairly controversial issue, and I love it when that happens. Many hugs for all. :love:

[Renault Delumiere]

Who said the thread was derailed or needed to be removed?

I'm simply saying the issue has already been discussed and resolved, so anyone coming in and responding with points that were already made because they failed to read the thread in it's entirety is mere redundancy.

 

We are now "beating the dead horse."

[synaesthetic]

If I am roleplaying with someone or someones, and some random person comes up to me and interjects themselves into my roleplay without permission with the intent to change or alter the plot, they will go on my blacklist. Period.

 

As long as they're not godmodding and trying to fuck around with my story, they can walk up and become involved if they want. If it's something I don't want other players to become involved with directly, I will write a ficlet instead of RP in game. Public involvement is kind of the point of in-game RP.

[Ildur]

The footnote to this whole issue is that OOC communication is key. Specially when your character holds any position of civil or military authority. It might be breaking your character to ignore the thieves in the alley, but if you ask them if they are willing to be discovered (and potentially arrested) and their answer is "No, sorry", then you just have to write them off from your micro-canon temporaly. Just as some NPCs are "phased out" to certain characters and not to others, like for example the children that spawn outside the Coffer and Coffin, who are only visible to those with the quest that spawned them, you can consider those people 'phased out' of your micro-canon. They are, as far as you are concerned, not there and, since they are not there, you are not breaking character by ignoring them.

 

Who said the thread was derailed or needed to be removed?

 

Bob the Bomb has a better question:

 

:bomb: - Who said you were implying this thread was derailed or needed removal?

 

Oh! And another good one, from Molly the Moogle

:moogle: - Why do you care if people want to keep discussing and exploring this topic, kupo?

 

If you consider it finished that is very fine. But expecting other people to come to the same conclusion or to not share their opinions on the matter is a bit ridicolous. Instead of grumpily declaring the 'beating of a dead horse' just point out to people that their arguments were already discussed before. No need to be a sarcastic about it or anything, or interrupt the ongoing conversation with a rude "just shut up" post. Instead, why don't you point out why they are being redundant? Then they'll answer back with something relevant, probably arguing why they aren't being redundant, and then you'll answer back and later they will...unless you are scared of getting involved in the discussion, in which case I have to wonder why you got involved anyways.

[ArmachiA]

Or, you know, stop reading the thread. Ain't no one got a gun to your head forcing you to read rehashed opinions.

[Renault Delumiere]

The footnote to this whole issue is that OOC communication is key. Specially when your character holds any position of civil or military authority. It might be breaking your character to ignore the thieves in the alley, but if you ask them if they are willing to be discovered (and potentially arrested) and their answer is "No, sorry", then you just have to write them off from your micro-canon temporaly. Just as some NPCs are "phased out" to certain characters and not to others, like for example the children that spawn outside the Coffer and Coffin, who are only visible to those with the quest that spawned them, you can consider those people 'phased out' of your micro-canon. They are, as far as you are concerned, not there and, since they are not there, you are not breaking character by ignoring them.

 

Who said the thread was derailed or needed to be removed?

 

Bob the Bomb has a better question:

 

:bomb: - Who said you were implying this thread was derailed or needed removal?

 

Oh! And another good one, from Molly the Moogle

:moogle: - Why do you care if people want to keep discussing and exploring this topic, kupo?

 

If you consider it finished that is very fine. But expecting other people to come to the same conclusion or to not share their opinions on the matter is a bit ridicolous. Instead of grumpily declaring the 'beating of a dead horse' just point out to people that their arguments were already discussed before. No need to be a sarcastic about it or anything, or interrupt the ongoing conversation with a rude "just shut up" post. Instead, why don't you point out why they are being redundant? Then they'll answer back with something relevant, probably arguing why they aren't being redundant, and then you'll answer back and later they will...unless you are scared of getting involved in the discussion, in which case I have to wonder why you got involved anyways.

 

You took my clever idea and butchered it, thanks.

[Kage]

To be honest I still feel a little worried because there were some posts that said that the walk up actions/decisions should be allowed/followed because the beginning interactions were allowed (ie allowing them to become a part of the RP,etc) so they essentially opened themselves to any of the actions brought up by a walk up.

 

What happens when you are happy with and fine with the initial interactions but half-way through the actions take a turn that does not jive well with the characters/plot? Break the pace immediately to OOC hash it out?

[Naunet]

What happens when you are happy with and fine with the initial interactions but half-way through the actions take a turn that does not jive well with the characters/plot? Break the pace immediately to OOC hash it out?

 

Yes. That is what you do precisely.

[ArmachiA]

Yes. OOC communication is the most important thing and even if it breaks the flow of the scene it needs to be done. I don't know why some people are so afraid of OOC communication, it's so necessary to prevent drama.

[LiadansWhisper]

Who said the thread was derailed or needed to be removed?

I'm simply saying the issue has already been discussed and resolved, so anyone coming in and responding with points that were already made because they failed to read the thread in it's entirety is mere redundancy.

 

We are now "beating the dead horse."

 

Welcome to the internet, where people do that all the time.  :thumbsup:

 

In all seriousness, if you think the topic is done, that's fine.  You're totally welcome to your opinion.  But it's really not okay for you to tell other people to "shut up."  If that wasn't your intention, then we're all good, but that's how your :tonberry: post came across.  

[Renault Delumiere]

Who said the thread was derailed or needed to be removed?

I'm simply saying the issue has already been discussed and resolved, so anyone coming in and responding with points that were already made because they failed to read the thread in it's entirety is mere redundancy.

 

We are now "beating the dead horse."

 

Welcome to the internet, where people do that all the time.  :thumbsup:

 

In all seriousness, if you think the topic is done, that's fine.  You're totally welcome to your opinion.  But it's really not okay for you to tell other people to "shut up."  If that wasn't your intention, then we're all good, but that's how your :tonberry: post came across.  

 

As you said, welcome to the internet.

 

This is a general statement: If you want your opinion to hold weight in a discussion, be sure to pay attention to (or in this case, read) the discussion.

[TheLastCandle]

You've done a great job of playing backseat moderator and flinging your poo at a topic that people were happy to continue discussing. Thanks for your contribution to the community you just joined.

[Seriphyn]

Question; was the person who "arrested" your character donned up in full Flames attire? If I'm seeing that screenshot right, it's a black mage? 

 

My Flames LS/FC copy the NPC uniform (from the overcoats to the open shirts out in the field)...we do this to claim validity, but not authority. If they were donned up as a black mage, then your character had every power to be like "Who are you? You're not in a Flame uniform". At best, it would be a member of the Free Brigade (which the game assumes all Immortal Flames player characters are in by default), and the adventurer units in the Grand Companies probably have lesser authority than the main fighting units.

 

Otherwise, it looks like a part-time employment of GC membership just when it is convenient. Among my group, we roleplay membership as a full-time thing, not something to deploy when we feel like it.

[LiadansWhisper]

Question; was the person who "arrested" your character donned up in full Flames attire? If I'm seeing that screenshot right, it's a black mage? 

 

My Flames LS/FC copy the NPC uniform (from the overcoats to the open shirts out in the field)...we do this to claim validity, but not authority. If they were donned up as a black mage, then your character had every power to be like "Who are you? You're not in a Flame uniform". At best, it would be a member of the Free Brigade (which the game assumes all Immortal Flames player characters are in by default), and the adventurer units in the Grand Companies probably have lesser authority than the main fighting units.

 

Otherwise, it looks like a part-time employment of GC membership just when it is convenient. Among my group, we roleplay membership as a full-time thing, not something to deploy when we feel like it.

 

From the description the OP gave, I think she ICly knew the Flame in question.