@Gingerlily said in Politics etc.:
What do you think would work for something that wasn't WoD?
I don't think any of the above is unique to the vampire game. It is easier to describe in vampire terms, but it could exist anywhere.
@Gingerlily said in Politics etc.:
@lordbelh Yeah that's a good point, about trying to keep it more chill and being able to deescalate. RfK clearly had systems for that but they are very grounded in vampire. What do you think would work for something that wasn't WoD?
Yeah, you just need an easily trackable way for people to exchange favors or 'boons.' The exchanging of favors is the backbone of any working political system, in game or irl. Political people need to know who owes them and be able to call in those favors when they're needed.
@lordbelh said in Politics etc.:
I'll add a willingness to embrace rather than shy away from healthy competition and factional conflict, and giving the tools to engage in them without necessitating ye telenukes.
This sums up the kind of PvP I think makes a game kick ass. In my own head, I dub this CvC rather than PvP, though -- since a lot of times, it's a cooperative player (PwP?) effort to get there rather than an oppositional one on the player level.
When I think of pure PvP -- players versus other players -- that line is a little blurrier, after a fashion? As though the term itself suggests an anti-cooperation mindset on the player level, rather than amongst the characters.
I am absolutely tangenting, but this is one of those things I wish we had better and more accurate terms for, sometimes.
Oh fucking well.
@surreality I think most PVP on most games become a question of just pure pride, because you don't have to think of the larger implications. They're just sandboxes. The only real resolution comes with the pure nuclear option, since there's no meaningful exchange short of that. You talk shit and stew in your cliques, and then it boils over until you go nuclear. You don't walk through all the stages that should come first, because they don't exist.
The problem is when the only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail.
So if the only skills which have been relevant in the past are ones that lead to the complete decimation of the opposition, either in terms of hacking at them with axes until they stop twitching or scorched earth politics trying to oust them from their faction/sphere/world (what was that Bloodline power which essentially de-associated someone from all their ties, which essentially caused the character to become exiled?) then every disagreement leads to extreme measures.
We get the game we encourage, right? If you know this is how all IC clashes get settled, if every disagreement is settled in a Highlander fashion, then of course there'll be OOC drama eventually since people get protective of the time and effort they invest in the game; at some point this 'all IC confrontation' crosses right into RL territory whether we like it or not, unless there's a way to escalate and defuse.
It's kinda like comics. There's a reason villains go to Blackgate instead of getting executed on the spot. A minor setback with the full potential of a triumphant comeback is far superior to a final solution.
@Arkandel said in Politics etc.:
The problem is when the only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail.
The other problem is when your players lack the intelligence to look at something other than a hammer as a viable option.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
@Ganymede I don't generally think intelligence has much to do with it. People will conform to the culture of the game. Smart people make terrible choices all the time.
@Ganymede "But, but, but MoOoOoOoOom! That would take effort and time away from gettin' mah freak on with Hotsy McEasypants!!!"
^ Only slightly paraphrased from a thing I heard shortly before a little piece of my soul died, circa 1998 or so.
And now I need a drink. Totally to toast that dead piece of soul, totally.
People make me sad.
@Ganymede said in Politics etc.:
@Arkandel said in Politics etc.:
The problem is when the only tool you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail.
The other problem is when your players lack the intelligence to look at something other than a hammer as a viable option.
True enough, but you don't get to choose your players. You do get to influence the players' culture (hopefully - there are no guarantees) through a number of ways, and one of them is through systems and mechanics offered specifically for it.
It's important to have social pressure valves for when things are getting heated between characters - or groups - so you can aim and whack a different target than the other kid's health points in retaliation for calling you names at the playground the other day.
@lordbelh said in Politics etc.:
I don't generally think intelligence has much to do with it. People will conform to the culture of the game. Smart people make terrible choices all the time.
There's a difference between making a bad choice and not realizing there's a choice at all.
An intelligent player is going to cream you in politics. Period. This happens time and time again. Be it you or HelloRaptor before he went crazy, you don't stand a chance against a player that understands how politics works. Unfortunately, most players don't -- and don't bother taking the time to consider it.
You can give people the tools, like on RfK, but you cannot force them to use them. Which is why RfK's second version failed so quickly.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
@Ganymede RfK 2.0 was run by people who, frankly, were incompetent. No offense to them, either. I figure they tried their best. But they didn't have the skills to staff a political game.
@lordbelh said in Politics etc.:
RfK 2.0 was run by people who, frankly, were incompetent. No offense to them, either. I figure they tried their best. But they didn't have the skills to staff a political game.
RfK 1.0 worked on auto-pilot for how long? Mostly because the players were intelligent and motivated enough to scheme among themselves.
I don't blame everything on the staff, but you're probably right on that. They dropped the ball more than once -- and dropped it hard.
Still, I sit on my point. Intelligent people figure out politics. Brutes resort to brute tactics.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
@Ganymede said in Politics etc.:
Still, I sit on my point. Intelligent people figure out politics. Brutes resort to brute tactics.
That is true. However we shouldn't underestimate other factors, such as OOC politics.
It's a well documented fact that people rolling together, being part of a clique or even knowing each other as players can convey in-game political advantages. That's a leg up, and it can be really hard to beat where it's part of the culture, independent of how shrewd or good they are at the game. If I'm negatively predisposed toward your character because FUCK GANY and so are all my entrenched buddies because we're a hivemind, even if you play your heart out you can only make so much leeway.
Just as an example.
@Arkandel said in Politics etc.:
If I'm negatively predisposed toward your character because FUCK GANY and so are all my entrenched buddies because we're a hivemind, even if you play your heart out you can only make so much leeway.
So?
You're not the entirety of the game, and, if you were, I simply wouldn't play there.
The fun is having everyone else turn on you and watching you flail in the above situation. And having you resort to brute tactics, only to be slapped the fuck down.
Intelligence also includes knowing when and if to fight.
Rfk2.0 stripped away all CoI staff protections present in the old game without disclosing that (and in some case actively deceiving) to the playerbase.
It was not incompetence though one of the headwizzen took advantage of that perception; it was malice.
Honestly the original rfk made me realize the importance of ethical and sacrificial staff to running a truly active political but oocly safe game.
I had been playing large multi sphere wod for so long my assumption of staff was largely that they were benign impediments and scaffolding help.
It was eye opening to see how much staff can have an impact--but also to see how high the bar truly is for sustaining things long term. 
@mietze said in Politics etc.:
It was eye opening to see how much staff can have an impact--but also to see how high the bar truly is for sustaining things long term.
They did not do themselves any favors by being overly-draconian. Staff members could not hold any titles, and I believe they could only have territory is vassaled. I expressly refused to staff there because I felt my PC had more value as a political player, which I could not do if I was staff.
I respect their goal, but they made the bar so high so as to discourage anyone from wanting to be staff. And, in the end, they were unable to sustain the game.
That's not to say that I would not advocate similar policies on my game, but they will be better moderated so as to not discourage people from wanting to staff to help the game out.
@Ganymede
And when are you opening a game, hrm?
@Lisse24 said in Politics etc.:
And when are you opening a game, hrm?
Shut up.
My system needs playtesting. I'm this close to getting the rule set ready for alpha. Then it falls to my trusty coders to do their work on their time.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
@mietze
RfK also suffered from a massive issue of 'one staffer to rule them all' which I think hindered the political processes. I was Nyarlethotep for a while and I attempted to help do things (mostly jobs to get things going, and ran the wiki organiation/revamp), run things, etc. The massive amount of workload (I logged in one day and had 60+ new jobs; I'd been logged out for 16 hours and there were 60 jobs or updates to jobs...), coupled with a lot of the necessity for Shav to look at things when stuff was starting out, or code tied to various systems not working because of (insert reasons here), also hurt RfK2.0. So there was a lot of stop and go with the process as well.
I wasn't aware of the CoI protections, and am idly curious what you mean in that regard (PMs are good) though.
@Gingerlily said in Politics etc.:
What do you think would work for something that wasn't WoD?
I don't think any of the above is unique to the vampire game. It is easier to describe in vampire terms, but it could exist anywhere.
