Goblin Squad Member
|
Well Magistry certainly plans on adhering to those principles, so we'd be happy to be included as signatories on this. Although I can't promise we'll end up in the southeast.
My problem is, what is the point here? What are you all trying to prove? You say you are promoting a better experience and a better playership. You see light and happiness and unity. I see blindfolds and another organization playing at hero, not realizing the discord they cause just by their sheer presence. If the reason this accord exists is simply to prove how righteous the groups who agree to it are, I would question the need to state it in the first place. But then again, I suppose now it is official right?I don't get this AT ALL. It's looking for problems where none exist. I don't get what's so controversial about support for positive gameplay.
Looking very forward to talking to you Toombstone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well Magistry certainly plans on adhering to those principles, so we'd be happy to be included as signatories on this. Although I can't promise we'll end up in the southeast.
We're very pleased and honored to have Magistry with us. I've listed your Company Recruitment Thread in the Roseblood Accord section of the Guild Recruitment & Helpful Links list.
Oh, and ending up in the southeast is certainly not a requirement. In fact, having friends in distant locations should make for some very interesting Caravan runs :)
Internet drama queens just can't be stopped.Whoa! Whoa! Calling Bluddwolf a queen is a bit much...
He is a princess at best :p
Princesses are better than queens. Everybody knows that.
Just everything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Princesses are better than queens. Everybody knows that.Internet drama queens just can't be stopped.Whoa! Whoa! Calling Bluddwolf a queen is a bit much...
He is a princess at best :p
It's true. How often does Disney do a movie where the queen is the Protagonist? I think they managed one a few years back where a queen has a strong supporting role, as a bear.
Brave was technically Pixar, not Disney Animated Canon. Elsa totally counts, though. Despite what the original source material might make you think, this Snow Queen is never really much of an antagonist at all—especially not to the viewer.
Anyways...Grickin Mode.
I like this! This is good, it's really good. Heavens know we need more civility in the Kingdoms. There's all those, those goblins there, and, see there, that's a speck of dust. The whole place is a mess. Needs a purging or three. Okay, on behalf of the Mooncalves, I hereby sign this petition.
Ten minutes later, Grickin would maim a member of the Accord and be put on the run. To this day, he claims he has no recollection of any roses or accordions, though he does like the "blood" angle.
I like the ideas professed in this thread, but the Accord itself seems more like a very casual alliance than the promise of civility some people seem to mistake it for. :P
I do respect it for being a bit less waffley than the Rovagug Pact, though.* At least this one I know right off the bat ain't Grickin's cuppa. He doesn't target new players who are polite. That's the Grickin Guarantee™.
*I think these pacts would be more successful if we did just define things, honestly (or at least gave examples of bad behavior). They'd at least have fewer arguments.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rules are appropriate when detailing very specific processes. For example, if there were a process for approving new Members to the Roseblood Accord, I would want there to be very well-defined rules for it. I would want to know how many votes were required, who's eligible to vote, etc.
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. It's a terrible thing when an otherwise virtuous person momentarily falls and some unbending rule is used to punish them out of all proportion. It's an even worse thing when a rule requires the very behavior these principles cry out against because the rule can't predict the totality of circumstances surrounding the act.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Elsa totally counts, though. Despite what the original source material might make you think, this Snow Queen is never really much of an antagonist at all—especially not to the viewer.
This confuses me a lot. The primary conflict of the whole story was the separation between Elsa and Anna created by Elsa keeping Anna at a distance. As the primary character driving the conflict that clearly makes Elsa the primary antagonist of the story. Prince Hans, was certainly a bad guy and created his own conflicts, but everything he did was very much secondary to the Elsa/Anna conflict.
I think you're confusing Antagonist and Bad Guy which are not the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the second time people tried using "Principles". Without rules or examples to back them up, they seem to attract a lot of drama when people want to know what you're talking about.
I'm not saying you have to nail this stuff to a wall, but you're trying to make a formal agreement. You can't just make your Accord "Yeah, be nice and stuff," and also imply there will be consequences for breaking said Accord.
That being said, now that you have clarified during that argument, it's a good deal easier to understand. But I at first just thought I was reading Rovagug Pact II.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Without rules or examples to back them up, they seem to attract a lot of drama when people want to know what you're talking about.
I daresay the folks causing the drama would cause just as much debating the validity of the well-defined rules, too.
You can't just make your Accord "Yeah, be nice and stuff," and also imply there will be consequences for breaking said Accord.
There are no "consequences" for breaking the Roseblood Accord that would not exist even if there were no Roseblood Accord. Anyone who allows themselves to get caught defining every consequence to every possible act in game is asking to be very, very busy and yet totally unproductive.
But I at first just thought I was reading Rovagug Pact II.
Ok, now I know you're just pulling my leg, you joker, you :)
Elsa totally counts, though. Despite what the original source material might make you think, this Snow Queen is never really much of an antagonist at all—especially not to the viewer.This confuses me a lot. The primary conflict of the whole story was the separation between Elsa and Anna created by Elsa keeping Anna at a distance. As the primary character driving the conflict that clearly makes Elsa the primary antagonist of the story. Prince Hans, was certainly a bad guy and created his own conflicts, but everything he did was very much secondary to the Elsa/Anna conflict.
I think you're confusing Antagonist and Bad Guy which are not the same thing.
Actually, I know the difference. Being frank, I assumed you didn't. Sorry, I misjudged ya. ;P
Just the fact that Elsa has an antagonistic role doesn't have any real bearing on this matter. She's the antagonist, but she's also the dual main character alongside Anna.
I daresay the folks causing the drama would cause just as much debating the validity of the well-defined rules, too.
Well, sure, but...well, okay, yeah.
There are no "consequences" for breaking the Roseblood Accord that would not exist even if there were no Roseblood Accord. Anyone who allows themselves to get caught defining every consequence to every possible act in game is asking to be very, very busy and yet totally unproductive.
And what about the examples? Surely some baselines could have at least made the drama go by faster.
Ok, now I know you're just pulling my leg, you joker, you :)
I'll grant that I don't have the best reading comprehension sometimes, but I'm not totally joking here. The rhetoric surrounding the agreement focuses on stuff like "positive environment" and "metagame"—implying this is another OOC agreement to help the community be strong and healthy.*
It was only on rereading that I noticed little things, like how the Accord is trying to help its own members, that I realized this wasn't really OOC at all. It's an alliance. That just took me time to work out.
*And, yeah, okay, you think your alliance will make things so. It may well. But you see what I mean, I hope.
I think my problem is this is a "nice guys" alliance, in an abstract manner of speaking. That made me think "OOC nice guy" stuff. It didn't help that UNC wanted in, of course.
In hindsight, that big initial drama about some leadership change I wasn't around to see probably should have tipped me off.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, I know the difference. Being frank, I assumed you didn't. Sorry, I misjudged ya. ;P
Just the fact that Elsa has an antagonistic role doesn't have any real bearing on this matter. She's the antagonist, but she's also the dual main character alongside Anna.
I see Anna opposing Elsa the entire story. Elsa pushes Anna away, and Anna just keeps coming right back. Certainly, Anna wants to be supportive, but the relationship is direct opposition.
Now Elsa certainly is a Main Character, but that is aside the point. My point from the beginning is that Elsa is not a Protagonist, and as everything she does throughout the whole story further drives the conflict she is obviously not in the Protagonist role.
Elsa is doing so to protect Anna from her magic, which I would argue to be a separate entity from Elsa until the very end.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I daresay the folks causing the drama would cause just as much debating the validity of the well-defined rules, too.Well, sure, but...well, okay, yeah.
LOL!
And what about the examples?
Don't attack folks that aren't flagged Hostile to you... unless you have a good reason.
Don't steal from folks that aren't flagged Hostile to you... unless you have a good reason.
Don't be rude or insulting to other players... unless you have a good reason.
Do those examples really illuminate anything? Or do you think they're more likely to be used as fuel for the fire by those who would hold us to an impossible standard, or attempt to turn our virtues against us with contrived examples in the single-minded pursuit of being able to stand up and yell "Hypocrites!"
The Roseblood Accord, more than anything else, is an invitation to others who share our values - without having to parse them down to well-defined rules - to come and play with us. You don't have to be in the same area, there are already some who will be quite distant. You don't have to join a Nation with us, that's already probably impossible for some of us. And you don't have to agree to abide by any terms, clauses, stipulations, or rules - if you share our values you'll already be doing the things we'd want you to do anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's like when people question evolution by saying "There are no transitional fossils! Look at these 2 fossils, A and C for example!"
Then you show them fossil B, and they go "Yeah now there's EVEN MORE GAPS! There's no transitional fossils between A and B, OR B and C!!!"
Defining poor behavior too specifically create a situation where people justify other poor behavior by saying "It wasn't on your list", or get into stupid arguments over the definitions of the words you use to point out why your list is flawed, or why their behavior is acceptable, or whatever.
I like GW's way of handling the rules. But they're GW. Nobody argues with GW (except when they do), they just argue about what GW means.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And soon, we will argue about whether that argument is worth having. Oh, god, I'm part of the problem.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
For the record, Anna antagonized Elsa the whole damned movie.
Merida as seen in Brave was not Disney canon, but a slim Disney version of her was crowned and added to the Disney Princess collection. BS if you ask me. Strong female character? Not slim enough.
As soon as your start defining things you have players that care more about the letter than the spirit of the thing. RAW v RAI. There will be none of that, and because there will be none of that we will strive all the harder to see the spirit succeed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Greetings Nihimon, et al.
As the official diplomatic representative of Deathwatch, I hereby pledge our affiliation to the Roseblood Accord. Most of our details can be found on our original Chartered Company introduction thread, however we are shying a bit away from the necromancy theme slightly (in light of the heinous flag mechanics that were announced sometime after that - we shall see how actual game mechanics will work in regards to how heavily involved we will be with necromancy at some future date).
Otherwise, we are simply a humble group of adventurers that wish to take part in a larger scheme of things. Alone, we are weak. As part of a larger group, we can not only benefit from the strength of numbers, but we also seek to offer our skills to benefit a greater cause. We believe we have found such a cause.
We are a True Neutral company - open minded to all sorts of adventurers, even if their tendencies may take them down one path or another. (Mechanically, it gives us five options for compatible alignments, versus four, or three.)
Our adventures may take us deep into dungeons, or perhaps onto the battlefield as wars between kingdoms ravage the land. With such a varied bunch, it is difficult to say exactly where we will end up from one month to the next, but I can assure you that we will do our best to make it a fun experience for those that join our sides.
I guess you could sum us up with this:
"Deathwatch: True Neutral - A group of adventurers of varied types."
I'd be happy to answer any questions via PM.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't steal from folks that aren't flagged Hostile to you... unless you have a good reason
I was going to avoid posting in this thread any longer, but this brought up a few questions.
First, and possibly obvious. Does this Accord discourage its members from attacking or stealing from non hostile groups, even those not in the accord?
Second, the above quote would also bar the use of a SAD, but the "unless you have good reason clause" has many implications.
What happens if accord members use the clause to justify attacking anyone they wish?
I would agree in most cases, that could still be "positive game play" but I was under the impression that you have advocated against that.
Why have a clause that opens up abusive activities?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Because we're pretty sure that the people who've signed up for it won't abuse it. And if they do, we'll know it when we see it. And take appropriate action.
Honestly Bludd, I think your time will be better spent policing your own members and whether they are abusing things than worrying about ours. We'll take care of that.
|
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. It's a terrible thing when an otherwise virtuous person momentarily falls and some unbending rule is used to punish them out of all proportion. It's an even worse thing when a rule requires the very behavior these principles cry out against because the rule can't predict the totality of circumstances surrounding the act.
This is approvingly similar to the core values of our various Rings in fact. The virtues attributed to each represent a state of being, or system of behaviors that help inform and guide RP. The idea isn't to bind people into some system laws and rules, but rather to encourage and assist them in following worthwhile philosophical ends.
It seems almost like a convergent evolution in means for consolidating and organizing player roles suited toward ends they can find satisfaction with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Don't steal from folks that aren't flagged Hostile to you... unless you have a good reasonWhy have a clause that opens up abusive activities?
Bluddwolf, I encourage you to re-read the entire post. I think you may have skimmed the text and missed (or ignored) the meaning.
[Edit] I should point out the relevant bits in my post that contained that context-free quote.
And what about the examples?Don't attack folks that aren't flagged Hostile to you... unless you have a good reason.
Don't steal from folks that aren't flagged Hostile to you... unless you have a good reason.
Don't be rude or insulting to other players... unless you have a good reason.
Do those examples really illuminate anything? Or do you think they're more likely to be used as fuel for the fire by those who would hold us to an impossible standard, or attempt to turn our virtues against us with contrived examples in the single-minded pursuit of being able to stand up and yell "Hypocrites!"
The Roseblood Accord, more than anything else, is an invitation to others who share our values - without having to parse them down to well-defined rules - to come and play with us. You don't have to be in the same area, there are already some who will be quite distant. You don't have to join a Nation with us, that's already probably impossible for some of us. And you don't have to agree to abide by any terms, , stipulations, or rules - if you share our values you'll already be doing the things we'd want you to do anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bluddwolf, I encourage you to re-read the entire post. I think you may have skimmed the text and missed (or ignored) the
I have read it, and just re read it, and it is a bit confusing to me. I'm stuck on the "Don'ts... Unless you have good reason" and the "You don't have to agree to abide by any terms, clauses, stipulations or rules".
It is no matter, as I wrote earlier, I had not really wanted to delve into this thread. There was that one point that just sparked my interest.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bludd, it is worth keeping in mind that Nihimon, and everyone else I have spoken to, is acutely aware of the diversity that makes up the parts of the Accord. It is not simply a two-pony show.
Curious and doubtful onlookers alike will have plenty of examples as to what can be accomplished in holding to the spirit of the Accord, while still actively looking out for your own interests. This is no different than any other group sharing mutual interests coming together.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Sometimes, in a human social group, one guy is very annoying and disrespectful. He doesn't break any laws, he is just a guy people don't want to be with. Well, what happen, then ? People just stop hanging around with him, and he doesn't get invited to partys anymore.
He didn't sign an agreement, when he joined said human social group in the first place. It doesn't mean that he can do whatever he wants. With us, or with other people.
I don't see what is the fuss, here. Spartans didn't use written laws, specifically because of what's happening in this thread.
As has been pointed out, this ain't Rovagug Pact, Take Two. This is something like a nonaggression pact between territories to (keeping this very general) make things safe for new players who ain't done nothin' wrong.
I don't think the geographic zone is part of it. Wasn't there already a big argument about that?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As has been pointed out, this ain't Rovagug Pact, Take Two. This is something like a nonaggression pact between territories to (keeping this very general) make things safe for new players who ain't done nothin' wrong.
I actually thought this was a pretty good description :)
As for the geographic part, there's definitely an invitation for like-minded groups to settle near us - we'll make great neighbors. But some members likely will be some distance from the southeast mountains, which will make for some great trips :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As for the geographic part, there's definitely an invitation for like-minded groups to settle near us - we'll make great neighbors. But some members likely will be some distance from the southeast mountains, which will make for some great trips :)
...for clarification, those of the Accord who are not settling in the SE will also make great neighbors.
|
|
...for clarification, those of the Accord who are not settling in the SE will also make great neighbors.As for the geographic part, there's definitely an invitation for like-minded groups to settle near us - we'll make great neighbors. But some members likely will be some distance from the southeast mountains, which will make for some great trips :)
Exactly this, like Dagedai initially, and remember once the land opens up more in OE the "SE" will be more like "Dead Center."