Lord of Girth
Assuming everyone as "Troublemakers" is only gatekeeping.
Star Wars Roleplay: Chaos
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Suggestion Rebellion rules and clarification
- Thread starter Aloy Vizsla
- Start date
Heir to the Empire
Aloy Vizsla
" I am confident that any faction who came for the story will win the hex, "
But a statement like this is made under the assumption that the side that came has no intention to put forth a fire story tho?
Once again that's basically gatekeeping chief. That's the bias from your paradigm showing rather than displaying or viewing it impartially, imo.
I am confident any faction who came to put forth a story will win the hex.
That would be the right way to look at it, imo. The former would paint anyone who doesn't support your narrative or isn't involved somehow in your specific circle as troublemakers. That's how you get echo chambers and seeing things in one way without being willing to be open to the idea that more than one group, even those who aren't directly aligned with what you're doing, are actually looking forwards to develop a fire narrative if possible.
sɪɴɴᴇʀs ʙʏ ᴅᴇᴇᴅ ʙᴜᴛ ʀɪɢʜᴛᴇᴏᴜs sᴛɪʟʟ
I'm not saying that all third party who join a rebellion are there to disrupt the thread. I'm saying that they can be, And that's why I made the suggestion.
What I mean by saying that anyone who came for the story can win the hex and that it shows in their writing is pretty what you just said dooku.
If they are there only to disrupt things, It will show in their writing and especially the narrative they put into the thread and they will most likely lose the opportunity to claim the hex, while one of the original parties will probably take it instead.
What I mean by saying that anyone who came for the story can win the hex and that it shows in their writing is pretty what you just said dooku.
If they are there only to disrupt things, It will show in their writing and especially the narrative they put into the thread and they will most likely lose the opportunity to claim the hex, while one of the original parties will probably take it instead.
Heir to the Empire
By making this suggestion you did so under the pretense that, in this example, the third party in question that you initially did not want to point fingers at, came with the desire to make trouble.
But for who tho? Who has the right to decide that they came to start trouble if there's a lack of solid communication between both sides to confirm this or not? If you don't communicate nor have the desire [and for reference I have no clue if you do or not, its just an example] to do so, then you won't know if that side actually wants to cause trouble, or simply want to write a good story.
Communication is the key for a smooth time for all parties involved, but if there is a lack of the aforementioned communication and you can only go off what you and those around you know, it's easy to assume and just start pointing fingers at those who don't fit your narrative as being there to start trouble, or go against you on a personal level.
It feels like your point of view runs off the assumption that its an Us versus Them type of thing, and not that this is a site filled with chances for cooperative roleplay on the fly, and that's a pretty bad way to view things, chief.
That's just my two cents though
Aloy Vizsla
But for who tho? Who has the right to decide that they came to start trouble if there's a lack of solid communication between both sides to confirm this or not? If you don't communicate nor have the desire [and for reference I have no clue if you do or not, its just an example] to do so, then you won't know if that side actually wants to cause trouble, or simply want to write a good story.
Communication is the key for a smooth time for all parties involved, but if there is a lack of the aforementioned communication and you can only go off what you and those around you know, it's easy to assume and just start pointing fingers at those who don't fit your narrative as being there to start trouble, or go against you on a personal level.
It feels like your point of view runs off the assumption that its an Us versus Them type of thing, and not that this is a site filled with chances for cooperative roleplay on the fly, and that's a pretty bad way to view things, chief.
That's just my two cents though
Aloy Vizsla
sɪɴɴᴇʀs ʙʏ ᴅᴇᴇᴅ ʙᴜᴛ ʀɪɢʜᴛᴇᴏᴜs sᴛɪʟʟ
Jokes aside, Since this is a discussion regarding future threads, Yeah, obviously in the future it'd be unwise to make that mistake. Not everyone is there to bust the thread. As for the previous thread, I mean too late now yeah? What's done is done and there's really no more reason to bring it up this far into the conversation. What I'm talking about is people in the future abusing certain mechanics and therefore breaking the rules. If you want to talk to me about that, Feel free to message more or start a thread somewhere and I'd be happy to explain to you where I'm coming from and why I see it as "Trouble", But this isn't about That thread. Maybe That thread served as inspiration, But as I said, nothing's going to be done about it because of this thread.
I'm not going to argue and tell you that you who's right or wrong when it comes to my views or whether you are correct or not in your assumption of my views. That's not what this is about. Ultimately, It doesn't matter what the views of the OP are in these suggestions, What matters is community feedback regarding how this affects the board at large, And not the two of us. Say what you want about the reason this came to be, What matters is how it affects the board later on and the reason someone is for or not for it. That's the conversation this is supposed to be about.
We can move this elsewhere Or let it rest, And make room for others to agree or disagree with you, But the back and forth over a thread that won't be affected by this and assumptions about myself are pointless imo
Either way, it's late and I'm sleeping, I'll check on this in the morning if it doesn't get locked over the back and forth
Heir to the Empire
it is what it is as far as I'm concerned, tbh.
peaceeee
peaceeee
Prefsbelt Commander
As a man who has no skin in the game, and given just the sheer amount of discourse around Rebellions, I think it should be deregulated totally. We're talking Kaeshana levels of rules. Just chaos. Anyone can get involved. Anyone can join, do whatever. Really let loose the dogs of war, and make something worth commemorating. Maybe not an OOC month this time, but yeah.
Just a suggestion on your suggestion.
Aloy Vizsla
Just a suggestion on your suggestion.
Aloy Vizsla
defy the tyrannous stars
I don't really have any skin in the game as far as who is right about the precipitating cause of this discussion, the independent minor rules after all were created for a reason but the perspectives here on both sides do point to a lack of communication.
I'm here to provide my unsolicited concerns about a growing attitude that seems to find collaboration 'superior' to competition. Some people find predetermined outcomes boring. Now I'm not trying to yuck anyone's yum if you want to do a thread like that by all means. But the map game does not allow for it's players to choose a personal preference.
This dance between crafting story and 'winning the game' is an old one. I hope anyone who knows my history is aware that I was never here to maintain any kind of win ratio. But too many times factions have used 'creative differences' as an excuse to turtle up and do nothing but build sandcastles. That's not great for the map.
There aren't any easy answers to these kinds of questions. Relying on the better angels of the community to regulate itself is ignoring that there will always be a lowest common denominator of civility however it's extremely difficult to bake out human nature aka 'the ooc of it all' with more rules.
One thing I'm pretty sure about is that expecting staff to litigate these kinds of disagreements only leads to more bad blood and fucked up voice chat conversations (no paper trail equals the perfect drama crime).
I'm here to provide my unsolicited concerns about a growing attitude that seems to find collaboration 'superior' to competition. Some people find predetermined outcomes boring. Now I'm not trying to yuck anyone's yum if you want to do a thread like that by all means. But the map game does not allow for it's players to choose a personal preference.
This dance between crafting story and 'winning the game' is an old one. I hope anyone who knows my history is aware that I was never here to maintain any kind of win ratio. But too many times factions have used 'creative differences' as an excuse to turtle up and do nothing but build sandcastles. That's not great for the map.
There aren't any easy answers to these kinds of questions. Relying on the better angels of the community to regulate itself is ignoring that there will always be a lowest common denominator of civility however it's extremely difficult to bake out human nature aka 'the ooc of it all' with more rules.
One thing I'm pretty sure about is that expecting staff to litigate these kinds of disagreements only leads to more bad blood and fucked up voice chat conversations (no paper trail equals the perfect drama crime).
THE UNDEFEATED
Warchief Waddles
I ain't reading all this sh*t but it was the rebellion of Kesh you were thinking of.
Good times.
L Admin
