In general, I'm fine with different folks having different interpretations of the tablet and plaque. I've said before that this encourages conflict and non "cookie-cutter" roles within the Village, and makes for more interesting RP - which is a good thing.

Again in general, the farther afield you go from the standard interpretation of both the tablet and plaque, the more you run the risk of coming into conflict with someone who doesn't agree with your interpretation. If said person is a Village leader, or a Village Immortal, you may not like the results. For example: Kasty has his own way of looking at the plaque when it comes to defenders and scouts. Ysal has her own way of looking at the plaque when it comes to Villagers in general. Our reactions to the same "transgression" by your character might range from complete indifference, to great praise, to a stern warning that this behavior won't be tolerated. Before you complain about the non-standardization of these reactions, remember that I'm talking about:

a) A village of barbarians, and

b) A character's particular non-standard interpretation of the tablet and plaque.

or make some other way for applicants to know whats expected of a battlerager without having to get every point explained by a PC
Oaths and Squires can read the cabal philosophys inside the cabal, but rager apps cant.

In general, I'm fine with the helpfile as it is now. I'm also fine with the learning process as it is now. Every Villager, Applicant or Member, is allowed to make mistakes. They eventually get corrected; if they make the same mistakes again, the correction will probably be a lot harsher.

Kastellyn the Devourer of Magic, Lord of Legends

*** Email me your testimonials or two-line blurbs. Help our marketing efforts! ***

You get these moron rule lawyers who want to quote word for word about things their character has NO WAY to know about. The words on the tablet and whatnot are for the village and the village ONLY. Why would some tard from Galadon know and be able to quote village dogma? What this would do is everytime some villager killed anyone who wasn't someone who thought they should be getting killed, the corpse in question would immediately begin quoting line and verse fromt he tablet to make some sort of case about why they shouldn't have been made dead, as if it would somehow make the death not have happened. This would make playing a villager an unimaginable chore, and I would likely delete or go perm-quiet just to avoid the inevitable migraine.

This already exists for every cabal out there.

Woe is the Outlander arguing against a Tribunal about what a Tribunal should or shouldn't be doing.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

>This already exists for every cabal out there.
>
>Woe is the Outlander arguing against a Tribunal about what a
>Tribunal should or shouldn't be doing.

I've never understood this, as a blanket rule. Sure, some outlanders are wildmen who have never seen civilization, but I don't see any reason that most of them couldn't know what tribunals should or shouldn't do. There's a difference between agreeing with a set of rules, and understanding it. Using someone's rules against them seems perfectly reasonable thing for an Outlander to do. That is, of course different from simply whining because they didn't follow their rules. But arguing them into a corner to your advantage seems okay.

If you're worried about someone new knowing what the village is about, I think it's already plainly spelt out within the academy.

I'm not opposed to having cabal philosophies as helpfiles. It would make them a bit more (though not a ton) accessible to the new player. I also completely agree that your first avenue should be interacting with other players to truly understand those philosophies.

That being said...Xeno...you're behaving like a jackass, and that will never help your cause.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

"That being said...Xeno...you're behaving like a jackass, and
that will never help your cause."

I'm not going emo, but I *have* noticed recently via forum searches every one of my threads with controvesy/debate ends up in the same place.

Food for thought I guess.

edit: i think maybe its because im right about most things most of the time, its hard to understand why people disagree

I'm not going emo, but I *have* noticed recently via forum searches every one of my threads with controvesy/debate ends up in the same place.

Conversely, most threads haven't been going to that place in recent years. We're deleting many fewer posts, and the ban list is short. My interpretation has been that most players have learned that it's not productive to be a jackass, and that being reasonable makes your point more clear. If you're ranting and raving, my time is important to me and I'm finding other things to read.

And if the forum community turns into 100 reasonable people and two jackasses, the overall utility of the discussions tends to go up by simply removing the two jackasses.

edit: i think maybe its because im right about most things most of the time, its hard to understand why people disagree

It may be hard to understand because you're exhausting your neurons trying to be, uh, clever and mashing the shift key. Responding to the content of people's posts will force you to think about what they are saying.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

If someone is disagreeing with you, it might be helpful to present a compromise that meets the desires (at least partially) of both. Like say, additions to the help file that give some of the most basic behavioral stuff you are looking for, but not removing the need to talk to current cabal members and learn from them. Having every village text available to people at level 1 might not be in the best interest of roleplay, but a help file addition that outlines some of the basics and suggests speaking to current members, etc. might satisfy both sides.

It doesn't always have to be either, or. (I read an article about this recently and have been trying to be more... compromising about things)

It's philosophy is simple, and it's rules loose.

The helpfile would probably consist of two lines:

Kill Magic (Bring own trophies)

Must Have Pride and Courage.

If an applicant doesn't know things like 'not to use Magic', then the tablet won't help - they need an elder to instruct them and point them to your neighbourhood lyceum for a dose of just how deep that lore's drawing from. It's worth mentioning they're also guidelines - not rules. You'd have to confer with a leader/elder to understand how they're applied in the here and now.

The best thing about the village is letting people fly their own way, do things how they want - and then lay the smack down as soon as you see they've gone too far. It encourages that same harsh learning curve that we enjoy in PK - and brings it into our roleplay for a 'rough edged, hard assed' feeling that I bet even Village Vets enjoy! I still remember the first time I ganked down a mage while on the way out with a ranking group. Ritur's roleplay was pretty much 'mage dead, I'm happy' but when it became clear to the immortal watching that the attitude could be the beginnings of some uncourageous antics - I got smacked down hard over CB. Five minutes later, and I'm redeeming myself by having my groupmates remove magical gear and stealing it off them while they rested

Although publishing the Tablet is doable, you'd then have to publish the Plaque as well. And then we're getting into huge amounts of information that should be found out in cool, fun IC ways. Not using a boiled down Battleraging for Dummies (ISBN:help2151)

When I imagine a helpfile like what you suggest, I just see a lot of people quoting it to bitch about parity (as if there aren't enough whining eejits who do it now).

Yhorian

Not having a way for Ragers to read tablet/plaque is as bad an idea as it would be to not let oaths read the imperial laws

You'd have a lot more Anathemas

Let's spell this out!

EMPIRE

Now I know it's a similar sized word, but it looks nothing like this one:

BATTLE

Don't get them confused. There is no law in the village. There are no solid rules. There is only Tradition, and the Sword.

Yhorian

expecting an newbie 1st time battle app who has never seen plaque/tablet to act like a villager is like expecting a newbie 1st time imperial who has never read laws to act like an imperial

It really dosen't make sense for the village app to not be able to have access to philosophy but a fort/acolyte/imperial app does.
Word of mouth is a terrrriibbble substitute.

Their rules are, by far, more complicated than Battle's.

I don't see them being written down for applicants.

That is because part of the journey, is LEARNING. It not only buffers roleplay, increases reasons for interaction and gives people an opportunity to get to know you - but it allows you to grow as a character. These are all positive things, why would you want to take them away?

The only reason Empire needs the laws written out is because failure carries such a harsh and unparalleled penalty! You still have to go through the act of bloodoathing to discover them (as far as I know) making it so it's not even a complete loss publishing them. This leaves the Tribunal as the only cabal that gives out the rules so readily.

Authors note: For godsake, you are not born with an intimate knowledge of every god damn thing in the game - please stop telling my hero how to fight with your lvl 12. Thanks

Yhorian

.

Outlander has no applicant status, your metaphor fails.

But I think you're right, it only makes sense that someone who is considered "in the cabal" by zulg to not be able to have access to the cabals philosophy. It only makes sense for someone "in the cabal" to have no direct access to the cabals rules. Seriously.
This is now a thread about petitioning the removal of this information for squires, scribes, and bloodoaths.

THESE PEOPLE ARE JUST "IN THE CABAL" ACCORDING TO ZULG. WHY THEY DESERVE ACCESS TO THE CABALS RULES IF THEYRE JUST "IN THE CABAL"? IF YOU'RE "IN THE CABAL", YOU SHOULDN'T BE SPOON FED THINGS LIKE BASIC RULES. YOU'RE JUST "IN THE CABAL" ACCORDING TO ZULG. YOU'RE NOT BORN WITH KNOWING THE BASIC RULES, AND AS A OATH, SCRIBE, ACOLYTE, AND VILLAGE APPLICANT YOU ARE ONLY IN THE CABAL. VILLAGE APPLICANTS CERTAINLY DONT DESERVE IT.

We need to remove the access to the information that scribes, squires, and bloodoaths have. It would be a learning process oath attacking in a city, or a acolyte breaking whatever their rules are, and get uninducted.
It's not fair to the squires, scribes, and bloodoaths that THEY get this information. Giving them this information ruins the learning experience.

It should take a newbie 150 extra hours to redeem themselves or a new character to get it right, once they #### up by breaking the MOST BASIC of their cabals rules and get smacked down.

Just like how great a learning experience it would be if bloodoaths couldn't read laws, or if scribes couldn't read their restrictions and got uninducted just for the sake of the basic information ON THE MOST BASIC REQUIREMENTS OF HOW TO ACT IN THE CABAL are not listed for them.

I agree, they can make a 2nd char if they want to get in, once their first gets uninducted/blacklisted and then they know what not to do.

Adding extra sarcasm doesn't make your point more correct.

Edited to add: Adding capital letters also doesn't make your point more correct.

Put the Imperial Laws in the Throne room, and try to tell me that the number of oaths to be anathema'd won't go up.

Battle's not Empire. A lot of your cabal should and generally does want to help you get it right if asked if you're Battle.

Yes, that does mean that you can't play a character whose family has been Battle for 89 generations as a Battle newbie. I'm okay with that.

In reference to what you two say, then maybe not post the plaque/tablet. But still, they should somehow be told the basic rules, which is hardly the entire battle philosophy.

A couple examples of things rager apps need to know, but can't read/help are things like they are not susposed to attack non mage/enemycabal players... and you can't kill a guy who eats a dried yellow flower or is wearing a charred bracer.

The battle applicant process is AUTOMATED, as such, they should be able to find out the rules without player interaction as well.
If not make a helpfile, maybe make Tahren say the rules when you become an app, such as the ones outlined above.

Since its automated process and imho its unfair to only give them "non-automated" access to the rules. Unfair like in, the newbie killed four guys for wearing charred bracers over the course of two days because he honest to god thought (Theyre using magic) it was ok... and by the time a battle player finally sees this, he gets kicked.
What about the 3 am battle app newbie when membership is low?

>A couple examples of things rager apps need to know, but can't
>read/help are things like they are not susposed to attack non
>mage/enemycabal players... and you can't kill a guy who eats a
>dried yellow flower or is wearing a charred bracer.

Where this gets interesting is, I don't think even those are set in stone depending on the leadership.

Maybe (for example if a npc says) Tahren says, "You are not susposed to attack non
mage/enemycabal players... and you can't kill a guy who eats a>dried yellow flower or is wearing a charred bracer... unless the Commander be saying otherwise."?

If a help file/thing to look at include same things?

Won't make any other post about this, peace.

1. You're interpreting rules in a certain way. They aren't fixed in the way in you want.

2. Serial battle player who was a newbie spending hundreds of hours dying to necromancers and antipaladins without getting inducted (my first battle char ever got inducted with 12 con left), imho the system is fine as is.

3. Beyond intepreting the rules a certain way, you're assuming the rules apply to people who aren't yet in the village. That's also another example of shoving your ideas onto other people's roleplay.

There's always an evil trib or two, for example, who pkills in the city without being caught before being inducted. For some reason, I don't see you posting about this.