Feedback: Roleplay

[Mbites]

Hello,

this is the thread for the 'Roleplay' section for the 'new' Legacy rules.
To summarize the changes:

1. Removing references to classic since its obsolete
2. Dumping some stuff and rewording
3. Adding some guidelines and codifying mod stances

Roleplay

While player’s are more or less free in the creation of their roleplay there are a few things that are either considered to be ‘bad-form’ or to be sensible with. Additionally a few things are banned. Please keep this section in mind when writing your posts and planning future Roleplay.

1. When planning multiplayer involving stories such as diplomatic visits or conflicts please always keep in mind that everyone has, almost certainly, differing perceptions on nations, regions and all the other kinds of entities existing in the Particracy universe, as such please make sure to clearly communicate what you want to tell and what you do not want to do. Enforcing your will on other people, powerplaying  are bad-form and will damage your reputation as a player.

2. All Roleplay is based on consent of the involved parties. For example: If you want to attack a nation by a different player, that player has to consent to that roleplay and can always chose to decline or void any RP that has not been sanctioned by him regarding this topic. While you can certainly rattle your sabres, there is not going to be armed conflict unless the other party agrees. We want to take this opportunity to once again draw attention to the importance of coordinating (large-scale) RP.

3. Referencing real-life characters, figures, nations, places, religions, organizations, nationalities (examples: Hitler, Jesus, NATO, Somali, Islam, Christianity, etc.) is strictly forbidden unless mentioned in an Out-of-Character (OOC) nature to convey understanding or provide background. This applies to real-life fictional references as well (examples: Finland, Cindarella, World of Warcraft, etc). Players are encouraged to come up with in-game equivalents. (A list for these is available [HERE <- link])

4. Role-play content must be original work and plagiarism of any kind is strictly banned. Players may quote or reference real-world material provided that this is limited and that they link to the original source in the text.

5. The utilization of AI (artificial intelligence) or ML (machine learning) tools to generate role-play content is strictly prohibited. The usage of AI/ML to generate images (that are safe for work and in accordance with other rules) is permitted for use.

6. The usage of Sci-fi and Fantasy elements is forbidden, you do not have to be hyper-realistic and can include a little weirdness but the technology is capped at what is currently available OOC. Obviously you have to be able to differentiate in the usage; nuclear fusion is not available commercially but the concept is in usage in research, as such in research your nation could be running these same experiments.

7. The reach of control ends at the borders of your nation, within these bounds you have absolute control (within the boundaries of the rules of course). Economic assets which stand in other nations are not within your control, if another player decides to seize them you cannot force them to engage in conflict to avoid it from happening; The consequences of this seizure meaning how this affects your nation in contrast IS within your control. Exception: Characters you created are also within your control even if they are abroad.

8. Characters are always owned by the player who originally used/created them. Users can transfer control of character via character transfers located [HERE]. Characters, noble houses/dynasties or bloodlines who have been inactive for 250 calendar years can be applied for using the aforementioned character transfer thread. Please note that any request for an "inactive" users characters, noble houses/dynasties or bloodlines must be accompanied by a brief synopsis on the requester plans for the character. As an alternative, players are authorized to create cadet branches of the primary noble houses/dynasties or bloodlines. For example, the the House of Smith has not been used but we want a Smith monarch, so I create the House of Smith-Johnson, which is related to the main "House of Smith" but is a cadet branch and thus able to be used and possessed by me in place of a character transfer or waiting another 250 years to use the character.

9. Retconning major events or big changes to established Roleplay are bad-form if not done correctly with community input or the Mod team.

10. Privileges in foreign nations formerly controlled by a player which are now empty cannot be expanded without the consent of a new player. 

[Doc]

Some of this may be nitpicky, but I mention it in the spirit of polishing, rather than criticizing.

1) Clarity. "... clearly communicate what you want to tell and what you do not want to do." I would say want to do, rather than want to tell.

2) Elaboration. "importance of coordinating (large-scale) RP." Could you maybe give an example of coordination, or a couple of different styles? I have found that there are different opinions about what constitutes coordination, and having some guidance would be helpful.

7) Elaboration. "Economic assets which stand in other nations are not within your control, if another player decides to seize them you cannot force them to engage in conflict to avoid it from happening." Can you elaborate on this. For example: Kalistan has significant economic investment in Gaduridos, but Gaduridos is either about to or has already gone empty. Does this mean that Kalistan can't access its economic investments in that country once it is empty? Rule 10 doesn't, in my opinion adequately cover this question, because I wouldn't be asking about expanding those things, just simply using them, which seems to contradict the quite definite language of this rule.

9) Elaboration. Can you provide a brief process for retconning? I think this would be beneficial for individuals who seek to square a country away and want to override things that players who aren't in a country anymore did which is just bizarre or complete out of the character of a nation (like switching from some European civilization to Ancient Egyptian for some reason...) No particular example in mind, just some additional elaboration here would be helpful.

Thank you for writing these up.

[Drax]

Think these will be workable and largely reflect accepted practice.

[Mbites]

Some of this may be nitpicky, but I mention it in the spirit of polishing, rather than criticizing.

1)  Clarity.  "... clearly communicate what you want to tell and what you do not want to do."  I would say want to do, rather than want to tell.

2)  Elaboration.  "importance of coordinating (large-scale) RP."  Could you maybe give an example of coordination, or a couple of different styles?  I have found that there are different opinions about what constitutes coordination, and having some guidance would be helpful.

7)  Elaboration.  "Economic assets which stand in other nations are not within your control, if another player decides to seize them you cannot force them to engage in conflict to avoid it from happening."  Can you elaborate on this.  For example:  Kalistan has significant economic investment in Gaduridos, but Gaduridos is either about to or has already gone empty.  Does this mean that Kalistan can't access its economic investments in that country once it is empty?  Rule 10 doesn't, in my opinion adequately cover this question, because I wouldn't be asking about expanding those things, just simply using them, which seems to contradict the quite definite language of this rule.

9)  Elaboration.  Can you provide a brief process for retconning?  I think this would be beneficial for individuals who seek to square a country away and want to override things that players who aren't in a country anymore did which is just bizarre or complete out of the character of a nation (like switching from some European civilization to Ancient Egyptian for some reason...)  No particular example in mind, just some additional elaboration here would be helpful.

Thank you for writing these up.

@Doc Thanks for the input on these, I think these are very good points, these will definitly find their way into the rules. Special thanks for pointing 7) out. I'll post the elaboration soon, probably tomorrow, I'll try to write something more clear and simple up, unfortunately hitting the right spot on 7) is gonna be very 'fine' rule-lawyering work.

@Drax Thanks for voicing your opinion.

[Auditorii]

With the development of legacy, could we perhaps finally get some consequences for actions of RP? One of the big things would be what was stated with economics, if a massive company is suddenly nationalized, there should be penalties for it? Why do players get the chance to hand-wave away other peoples RP?

[Mbites]

With the development of legacy, could we perhaps finally get some consequences for actions of RP? One of the big things would be what was stated with economics, if a massive company is suddenly nationalized, there should be penalties for it? Why do players get the chance to hand-wave away other peoples RP?

It is a consequence of consent-based Roleplay; Usually these things can be mitigated by communicating with whoever you want to 'hit.'

[GreekIdiot]

May I suggest a summary or principles or pillars or something?

something of the "how this game is played" sort. RP game, consent, sportsmanlike, planning, coordination?

a tl;dr gist if you will

[Doc]

May I suggest a summary or principles or pillars or something?

something of the "how this game is played" sort. RP game, consent, sportsmanlike, planning, coordination?

a tl;dr gist if you will

http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.ph...66#p155066
And 
http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.ph...08#p104860

[GreekIdiot]

May I suggest a summary or principles or pillars or something?

something of the "how this game is played" sort. RP game, consent, sportsmanlike, planning, coordination?

a tl;dr gist if you will

http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.ph...66#p155066
And 
http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.ph...08#p104860

Oh, these are golden, thanks Doc!

[GreekIdiot]

@Doc @Mbites (and anyone else for that matter)

I started a new topic so we can have a clear basis for the upcoming "split" and the work the mods are doing on game rule refinements.

Would appreciate any feedback whatsoever (@Mbites, if I messed up section titles and whatnot, please feel free to edit them).

https://forum.prtcy.com/thread-318.html