Why I choose .... - English - Foro de la Comunidad Ryzom

#22 Añadido por Sueky(arispotle) 1 década hace Reportar | Citar [en]

Good Points Eivor.

You and Marelli have nailed the main issues for reasons to flame the topics. And the only solution I have to them is the No Comments rule.

I could provide a character skeleton to be followed? Maybe a character skeleton will help separate the IC and OOC point of views of participating players. Adding the CS will substitute the "you can write IC or OOC" rule.

Example:

Name:
Race:
Cult:
Civ:
Biography/Introduction:
OOC Notes:

I'm also considering adding an explenation of fame for each faction, and their perks and restrictions towards game play/mechanics. Or provide links to these topics already on the forums.

Última edición por Sueky(arispotle) (1 década hace)

#23 Añadido por Sueky(arispotle) 1 década hace Reportar | Citar [en]

{translate}

Thank you everyone who participated in the poll. Though the poll is close your opinions continues to be important.

I came across the explanation of the higher powers, the nations, and the neutrals in the wiki.

From the very beginning, the players who didn't align with any faction and thus remained neutral have often been referred to as the third faction (in the case of the higher powers) or the fifth faction (in the case of the civilizations). It's a matter of opinion whether neutrality is actually a faction or rather the lack of faction.

This issue was only complicated further when different kinds of neutral were implemented: Hominists who are friendly with all nations, Marauders who are hostile to all nations, Theists who are friendly with both higher powers and Antitheists who are hostile to both higher powers. All those groups also get their own Faction PvP icon.

And of course, there are still the remaining neutrals who don't fall into any of those groups. So all in all there are now 6 different neutral factions.

I am now hesitant to title the Neutral topic as Theists and give Marauders their own topic, though it seems the game is moving towards giving players the opportunity to become full-fledged Marauders. Technically Marauders fall under the neutral flag, which is what our good friend Suboxide was trying to explain.

I continue to do more research and to try and figure out the best method to have these topics without them becoming a means to flaming.

#24 Añadido por Marelli(arispotle) 1 década hace Reportar | Citar [en]

{translate}

Eivor

I think this is a great idea, but having been hit by the lore-stick (very Selective interpretation of lore ignoring the actual game-world) before, I'm leery of allowing lore as the sole basis of comment.

Well I never meant it as having to be based in "THE lore as deemed official by the self-appointed RP-cabal". Different interpretations of the lore are part of the reason why one would chose one faction or the other.

I meant it as reasons based on the game itself rather than based on other players, because I wanted to avoid reasons along the line of "I chose Kara because Kami players are all doo-doo heads". But even then I had my doubts because reasons based on other players also include many great RP stories like "this and this person taught me the Kami ways when I was young" etc.

And Eivor correctly points out that fighting over different interpretations of the lore can bring up just as much flaming anyways, so my idea is shot and the No Comments rule is still the best we have.

#25 Añadido por Sueky(arispotle) 1 década hace Reportar | Citar [en]

{translate}

Marelli

..."self-appointed RP-cabal"...

Where are these people, I want to meet them? :P

#26 Añadido por Marelli(arispotle) 1 década hace Reportar | Citar [en]

{translate}

On Aniro, I think :P