Goblin Squad Member
|
hahaha, gosh I need to stop going camping after asking questions.
I forgot who said what for the most part so here:
1. Questioning where the answers are plain and the questions are already asked and passed on: this has been my stated goal in PfO from the beginning, I don't know what else to say heh.
2. Questioning others: Ask Bludd, Dragn, Nihimon, or any other prominent leader type and you'll see I have asked them all about their stuff, some in private some in public.
3. Questioning new guilds and stuff: Nah man, just got done with finals and am on vacation. LAZINESSSSSS, I got books to read and stuff.
4. I'm Don Quixote: Yeah, "insanity", "zealous conviction", and "uncaring about the truth other than how I see it" tend to lead to that description. Glad I can keep to my role convincingly ^^
5. "Doom and Gloom": Yes. I repeated it. Multiple times. I did this so I could be clearly understood. I have a habit, however, of backtracking and reguessing how I state things, and so I often don't know if people understand me... which means more repetition.
6. Accord = positive gameplay: Yeah I understand. I am suggesting, however, that often groups who hold themselves in high esteem and pristine conditions as a shining beacon city on a hill often become a source of enmity and jealousy, even if that is not the intent and there is no reasoning for it. People will see barriers where there aren't, factions where they shouldn't be, and so on. The shining compassionate knight helping the reluctant untrustworthy peasant image. As said in #5 this is a rehashing of my same message, so if you have further discussion for this point i'd suggest pm'ing me.
7. Don't like it, don't have to join: raises eyebrow, looks around
8. Blindfolds and being a good man: In regards to these... I don't think I was understood properly. But no matter, either you understand, will understand, or a bloody reckoning will ensue. It really isn't a point to argue, just something I was pointing out.
Anyway, Good luck guys. Hopefully you won't need it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here we see, or at least I see, an agency which is attempting, by consensual council, to determine the right and wrong of the metaphysical world that would exclude others (such as the UNC) simply for having possibly at-odds opinions with other members, and that would propose to, after implementing these vague universals, not bother to enforce themselves to uphold that, except by nature of their own virtue.
So it can be inferred that you have an issue with a proposition that in a world of individuals there is no absolute morality or ethic. You perceive the problem that in the metagame of players (as opposed to the in-game alignment absolutism) the array of moral relativism is too arbitrary to be useful and any enforcement by said consortium will also end as a capricious tyranny.
I offer a counterargument that there is an analogous continuum, a spectrum if you will, between good and bad that, if good play were white and bad play were black we will find expressed a spectrum of grey between the two absolutes. Every member of the accord has an idea of what good play is, and their expression of that personal ideal is a shade of grey. But all these shades can also be taken together to express one communal shade, the expression of good play-bad play balance in the River Kingdoms.
The members of the Roseblood Accord have agreed and committed to ensuring that the overall shade of grey is ever more white than black, and that what it is that defines darkness and lightness is the fun the game affords to the player population, majority rules. Implicit in this, and something it seems few have considered, is that IF the overwhelming majority in the player population turns out to be very much 'darker' than Accord members prefer then we must either concur with the majority and modify our own behavior 'darkward' or abandon our own play. IF the general population is 'lighter' then we too must adjust our play or abandon our positions similarly.
This estate is arguably a natural consequence of the Accord, because unlike the environment of Golarion, most of the player community is condemned to live in a morally relativistic culture.
The power each of us holds is primarily over ourselves. We rule our own behavior with a fist of iron. And if another player or player organization is sufficiently more dark than we are, then we accept the responsibility of making the darkness more light as a solemn duty.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When you're talking about behavior, it's much better to stick to Principles. Honesty and Integrity, Honor and Courage, Wisdom and Temperance - folks who have an innate understanding of these principles, and a drive to embody them don't need rules.
paraphrasing St. Paul: "He is truly free who, by his own nature, lives the Law."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do lawdie Jezuz, I've missed you Being XD haha, anyway *coughs*
So it can be inferred that you have an issue with a proposition that in a world of individuals there is no absolute morality or ethic. You perceive the problem that in the metagame of players (as opposed to the in-game alignment absolutism) the array of moral relativism is too arbitrary to be useful and any enforcement by said consortium will also end as a capricious tyranny.
Um... no. I'm saying, in regards to enforcement, it would appear that for all the hopes and ideals, relative and arbitrary as they are, the Roseblood Accord fails to have the strength of faith and conviction to do what is necessary to back themselves up, leaving it to each individual nation to decide when to jump in or not.
Much like the real-world League of Nations.
I offer a counterargument that there is an analogous continuum, a spectrum if you will, between good and bad that, if good play were white and bad play were black we will find expressed a spectrum of grey between the two absolutes. Every member of the accord has an idea of what good play is, and their expression of that personal ideal is a shade of grey. But all these shades can also be taken together to express one communal shade, the expression of good play-bad play balance in the River Kingdoms.
I would offer the rebuttal that no, life is not a continuum of Good and Bad, but rather there is an absolute Good and an absolute Bad. However, as we all know, beings such as we are completely incapable of committing either absolute evil or absolute good (Jesus, Bhudda, Krishna, etc. notwithstanding) there is instead a continuum of good and bad actions. This, however, was not the point of my discussion, I only wanted to state that people have differing ideals (which you also agreed upon) and this breeds conflict.
To make it simpler, we both agree there is a continuum wherein people reside both in ideal and in action. Because people are different they have different ideals and actions, and this will cause conflict.
The members of the Roseblood Accord have agreed and committed to ensuring that the overall shade of grey is ever more white than black, and that what it is that defines darkness and lightness is the fun the game affords to the player population, majority rules. Implicit in this, and something it seems few have considered, is that IF the overwhelming majority in the player population turns out to be very much 'darker' than Accord members prefer then we must either concur with the majority and modify our own behavior 'darkward' or abandon our own play. IF the general population is 'lighter' then we too must adjust our play or abandon our positions similarly.
This estate is arguably a natural...
I'll start by reminding that my character "knows" good is fair and bad is unfair, specifically repressed populaces vs tyrants, captives vs. captors. He does not care about the alignment system, as that is something he feels the gods use simply to claim their own and to put down those they dislike. I was arguing with my character in mind, so I just wanted to remind all.
Putting Zael aside for the moment, for it is obvious he wouldn't care "lightward" vs. "darkward" in the sense you discuss,
I have no problem with the Roseblood Accord existing in the meta, and while I can nitpick this section of your quote apart, it wouldn't be for any point. In my responses to the accord and the subsequent discussion I was simply trying to inform on my characters in-game-ish view on it (yes with the meta applied). I would disagree with your claim, though, in that the Roseblood Accord members are going to modify their gameplay based on the way things are happening... It seems to me most of the members are here to make a stand in the "right", be it for a sense of justice, greed, propriety, alliance, influence, or whatever. In any case with people like TEO joining on, I'd imagine that this will be used as an example to later people when trying to create "righteous" agreements and how people enjoy playing. It will be Roseblood v. Bludd's villain council v. whatever it is Shadowhaven and/or Golgotha have cooking.
Setting even that all aside, in the greater scheme of the debate I was trying to discuss the enmity such organizations create among contemporaries, for whatever reason they contrive. In addition I was trying to point out how much this smells like a quasi-League of Nations and that while everyone has jumped on all the other accords so far for being so LoN/UN like, nobody has done that here though it clearly was in need (at least to my perspective). In addition, it is easy to manipulate these types of groups both from the inside and out, and i was trying to caution the signees to keep track of everyone else who is a part of it... you never know what some people will do "in the name of the cause." amiright?!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Do lawdie Jezuz, I've missed you Being XD haha, anyway *coughs*Likewise I'm sure: So good to see your text.
this will cause conflict
Every good tale is filled with conflict. No good tale lacks conflict.
And we need strong characters to drive that conflict. Conflict is the life of the story we will live.
My mission in the Accord, and within T7V, is to fend off entropy, to ensure that the cardinal powers remain sufficiently viable to continue said conflict. While conflict is active and dynamic it will keep the River Kingdoms from the failure that is entropy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
We, Elves of Taur Im Duinath, have heard the fair people of the Rose Blood Accord and would like them to know that we share their plight for civilized relations.
The settlement of Taur Im Duinath is by this word and from now bound to the principles of The Roseblood Accord.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Welcome, Taur im Duinath! If nothing else, a perfect reason to make sure we spell your name correctly from now on.
The Dwarves are right over there --->. Go start arguing...you know you want to.
If the LN Dwarven settlement and the CG Elven one can co-exist within the Accord, maybe that will put to rest the idea that the Roseblood Accord is just a proto-kingdom?
If not, maybe Forgeholm and Taur im Duinath will have to declare a feud early in the EE. I'm sure both groups can use the combat practice for when the real baddies show up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I guess I can't say I have a huge problem with it if it's not taken too far. I mean if Forgeholm for example wanted to try and make their settlement work with *only* dwarfs...I dunno, I wouldn't have an issue with it. I don't consider myself an arbiter of who can and cannot agree to the Accord though. As far as I'm concerned virtually anyone can agree to work toward a positive play environment.
If any specific cases that are causes for concern arise I'm sure those could be discussed though.
Is Roseblood Good organizations only?
I sympathize with you, Papaver. That sucks. For my part, I see the elves as more "harmless old grandpa" racist than "southern man" racist. Less Hitler, more Pierce Hawthorne from Community.
Troy: "Hey, at least he doesn't think Shirley's my mom anymore. He thinks we're cousins."
Pierce: "You're not?"
Abed: "He still thinks I'm a terrorist."
Pierce: "If you're not, I'm sorry. If you are, I'm a hero. I'm willing to take that chance."
The elves are those nice but uneducated buffoons, to put it in a somewhat exaggerated sense.
Although I'm not Roseblood, I hope this can be reconciled. You shouldn't have to feel attacked by your own gaming community, but that's definitely not the elf players' intention. :/
EDIT: For the record, I'm very, very tired right now and about to head to bed. So, sorry if there're any faux paseses here. I'm taking a -2 on Perception checks right now. I think. What were the rules again? ;_;
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Welcome, Taur-Im-Duinath!
My apologies if this will look hostile in any way but I feel very strongly regarding this topic. This question goes to all members of RA: how is a settlement that has what is basically RP racism at its core compatible with Roseblood?
This is a difficult question. Only thing I can say is that there will also be a lot of RP killing in the game, but I do not know if that helps your situation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A reminder for newer folks:
If you like the idea of positive gameplay that makes the game fun for everyone but don't want to commit to the "mutual benefit" in-game part of Roseblood Accord (for whatever reasons, wink wink nudge nudge say no more)
you can find something for that here.
And all members of RA are welcome and encouraged to also sign the RKP to demonstrate this open world pvp game's support of good gamesmanship to any potential new players.