Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning
-
@Roz And maybe hit on you which is always nice because Aleksei is rather charming about it.
-
@yourmamasayswhat Aw, thanks!
-
I think the primary issue vis a vis the polyamory thing when you're talking about nobles is that typically speaking noble marriages are constrained as a matter of contract principles vis a vis trade arrangements, treaties, etc., so your average noble may have an open relationship as much as she likes, but probably not multiple husbands at the same time. Thematically.
-
@Shayd said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Further, I can't really imagine any society that prostitution in one form or another wouldn't happen.
There is actually a full thread on this elsewhere. Specifically.
In the end, the one thing I can't get past is this: there's no stigma about eating as a part of life in the world we know today. We still pay exceptionally good cooks to feed us once in a while because they do what they do so well, their skill as a cook is valued and appreciated and enjoyed, and thus they can make a living at it. There is zero shame and zero stigma: it's a part of life, it's normal.
If someone insisted that we shouldn't have professional chefs in the real world because for too long women were forced to cook and slave for their man or something similar, they'd get a confused-puppy-esque head tilt out of me before I abruptly decided they were not worth the time to argue with before just adding them to the mental catalogue of crazy people I needn't waste my time on.
THAT SAID, if a game wants to make a rule that says, "You know, we really just don't want characters of this type on our game," -- which they more or less did in all fairness here -- that's no harm, no foul. Leaping the logic around to poof it into nonexistence in a way that creates a new stigma that wouldn't rationally exist under those circumstances is just not even worth poking with the world's largest bargepole. Go with the 'we don't want to see the character type here' and really, just let it go. The mental gymnastics aren't worth the time, and they aren't going to change the reality on the ground anyway. (Generic) We play on games with dragons and vampires and psychic space aliens; just suspend that disbelief and move on.
-
@Shayd said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Here's some things that are dichotomies that must be accepted on the game that I have questions about. Please note: my conclusions or even statements may well be incorrect, poor, or stupid. But I feel uncomfortable even bringing them up in-game:
Everything else aside, if we just kept this one thought, it's already showing something's very wrong. Wtf, it's a game. People shouldn't feel uncomfortable asking about things OOC.
Thralldom:
a) PvP is highly discouraged.
b) Thrax holds thralls, which are indentured servants who are oft kept by increasing debts.
c) Opposing Thrax seems to be a bad idea and only doable politically, and at great risk.
d) Opposing Thrax regarding thralls from within seems to be a problem as well (I have no personal experience, just anecdotes).
e) Most anyone who isn't Thrax is instilled societally with a definitive dislike for the concept of thralldom.So playing a character who would do something about it as-written, it appears as if you're throttled both whether you want to work in the system to fix it , or outside the system to topple it.
Again, from the point of view of a Thrax player.... PvP is discouraged, but politics are not. We're in a political game! That's kind of the point. You can respond in different ways than stabbing a guy in the eye, you know what I mean?
Now, whether it's a bad idea to oppose one of the Greater Houses is basically a point of view. What I don't understand (and I don't mean that rhetorically, I really don't get it) is thinking there is some great risk, or that it's a problem in some way; what are you referring to?
What I think works, in either case, is to not look at thralldom as a problem to be solved. Perhaps look at it as an opportunity for roleplay instead. In other words don't focus so overly much of these things as obstacles but as props meant to facilitate RP; if they weren't there the game wouldn't be better, it would be poorer, since there would be fewer things to roleplay about.
If anyone within Thrax or otherwise tries to OOC dissuade you from playing, makes threats even in a hah-hah-no-but-really fashion or tries to keep you from participating in scenes - say, by omitting you specifically from meetings you should have had access to - then they are assholes. It's pretty much as simple as that.
My offer stands; if you have any issues whatsoever getting RP with Thrax, talk to me in-game.
I'll add to the last bit, if it matters: While I have in the past, it's been many years since I myself pursued TS, and I don't seek it out (I was pursuing romance, not sex). Further, I can't really imagine any society that prostitution in one form or another wouldn't happen. There's always going to be someone who wants a different sort of sex that they cannot easily find or negotiate for free, and there's always going to be someone willing to sell or trade that.
I will be very frank here: I have tried very hard to say nothing in-game about any of these issues - sexuality, prostitution, language - on any public channels, since it's known to trigger Hellfrog hard. Make of that what you will.
On MSB I have no such issues; it's dumb. It's catering to a specific person's political agenda served through a game. I won't do it on the MU* but it makes no sense to me.
In conclusion: frankly, I'd be happier with a game where there was a flat-out statement: We don't want to touch on human sexuality here because people have many varied and different opinions and expressions thereof, so please don't play here if that's what you want.
To be fair they've basically said that in almost those words.
@yourmamasayswhat said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Reading about the bans and the logs, especially with the former being so, as someone stated 'nuclear' as far as a reaction, my fear is that it's going to make players more afraid of staff than willing to reach out to them, as it has done with me. I'm legit //terrified// of saying //anything// in OOC, be they pages or public channels, that it will be taken the wrong way, presented to staff, and then held against me at some later date, no matter how great my reputation for being a helpful player is.
At some point it's conceivable the only people reaching out to staff are those who're prepared to agree 100% with them, unless this culture changes. Maybe they are satisfied with it - I don't know - but they are shooting themselves in the foot.
They are basically antagonizing their own players.
-
Kill the conversation! Kill it with fire!
Also, @Shayd , they typically warn you before showing you the door. At least they used to.
-
I'm kind of confused about the idea that we don't RP about sex on the game or deal with sexuality on the game, though. I mean, maybe you don't?? But I have RPed about sex a fair amount, both doing it and talking about it, in a variety of sexuality flavors.
Also I hit on Luca like, all the time.
-
@Shayd said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
I was involved in a duel over the idea of polyamory where my character was portrayed as less than honorable because of a publically-expressed (non-sexual) musing about it. I'm willing to fully own the idea that I portrayed myself poorly, or that I was wrong.
Okay, I now realize what this is referring to, and yeah I think your character probably expressed themselves poorly in their journal. Also it was like -- involving another character shortly after the love of their life died? So it was pretty IC for them to be sensitive to someone publicly commenting in a negative light about the relationship.
-
@surreality said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
This is one of the reasons that if ever I have staff who have to translate surreality into people-speak? At least once, I need to have a chat with them on skype -- even if it's just once, because the number of misunderstandings this has prevented is stunning; same as if I end up talking to someone later and there's the forehead smack moment of, 'Oh! I totally get it, now!'. Problem being, I type in precisely the same weird-ass way I talk, but a lot of times I go off into crazy hyperbole that I know is meant in a silly tone to keep the mood light because I'm more or less a living cartoon of a person (it is so much worse with video, for real, no one would be able to take me seriously ever again), but... all the sigh in the world with that sometimes, because I forget how much tone is a thing.
I feel you. So much. This is also my life.
-
@saosmash ...there are people who don't hit on Luca?
-
@yourmamasayswhat I know, right? I mean, why wouldn't you??
-
They are a myth. Like Santa clause.
#FreeFarfalla
-
@Shayd said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
I was involved in a duel over the idea of polyamory where my character was portrayed as less than honorable because of a publically-expressed (non-sexual) musing about it. I'm willing to fully own the idea that I portrayed myself poorly, or that I was wrong.
eeeeeh, you were involved in a duel involving bi-erasure. (And polyamory).
-
@yourmamasayswhat said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Reading about the bans and the logs, especially with the former being so, as someone stated 'nuclear' as far as a reaction, my fear is that it's going to make players more afraid of staff than willing to reach out to them, as it has done with me. I'm legit //terrified// of saying //anything// in OOC, be they pages or public channels, that it will be taken the wrong way, presented to staff, and then held against me at some later date, no matter how great my reputation for being a helpful player is. I don't want to log into a game where I'm scared half the time that I'll do something that I think is at worse, neutral and at best, helpful, and have it taken to staff and presented as me being something I sincerely wasn't. I'm trying to trust that my previous actions and general track record will ensure that staff will talk to me first before making such a 'nuclear' decisions as banning me, but at the moment it's hard to get past all the knee-jerk reactions and rampant rumors.
I say this while I deeply love the game and in general the Arx community. I really hope things get better and don't degrade into an environment full of anxiety and fear. I love my character and I'd hate to lose him just because I was misunderstood.
I am pretty sure that neither of the two recent bans (or any others that I've heard about, really) were really only because of one single conversation with no prior history of conflict. There's usually a final straw in instances like this, but it's rarely the first straw.
-
Technically I think the bi erasure came after the duel was already happening. To be fair.
-
@yourmamasayswhat My bit prefers Ferrando! She also hits on everyone, regardless of who they are and what they do so, for her, Luca is just someone to hit on and a prince, not someone she sets out to hit on. Unless he decides to actually take her up on some of her offers. Ferrando is someone she always declares her love too and makes him do pointless things. So adorable. Mind, her love for him is more platonic than her declarations of love and dlirtign seems.
-
@lordbelh - You will be greatly missed IC and OOC on game. I loved the dynamic you brought to Victus and I will always remember our scenes fondly. I can't tell you how heartbroken I am. I am so thankful we played this week. No one can be Victus other than you.
I hope we find each other again on another game. xoxo -
@saosmash said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
Technically I think the bi erasure came after the duel was already happening. To be fair.
I am compelled to disagree. @Shayd put forth the idea that it was an "either men or women" idea to begin with, and then implied that being attracted to both men and women naturally alludes to polygamy/polyamory. (All ICly, to be clear.)
While this is wholly pondering on my part, I suspect that had his character expressed interest in multiple people as lovers no one would say boo, because having multiple lovers is not anathema. But there IS a very particular cultural opinion about marriage and the oath involved and that is where the kerfluffle began. It proceeded to degrade from there.
With that in mind, I also want to point out that @Shayd ICly apologized an dueled and was beaten, and was reasonably gracious about it.
PS - @Roz any time Aleksei wants to be Sam's cabana boy/palm leaf fanner/alternate dinner date. I'M NOT SAYING, I'M JUST SAYING.
-
@Meg said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:
They are a myth. Like Santa clause.
I don't hit on Luca! Does this mean I'm mythical? Or, to pick another word, legendary?
a.k.a. Packetdancer (or "Pax" for short)
-
@Sparks You don't hit on anyone, though.
