A way to make Eleusian RP make sense for -everyone-

15791011

Comments

  • edited June 2017
    On the other hand, there are pacifists/non-combatants who do shout "NO! YOU ARE DOING FUN WRONG! STOP IT!" and thereby drive combatants away.

    You'll notice Eleusis no long has people like Exelethril, Rom, and Iakimen. Cyrene lost Kalila. Probably more that I don't know.

    This is from my experience in Hashan. The city has a unique quality of being "managed" by a combat-y core group whilst accommodating a far larger non-combatant population. It works well enough (never mind the whole Twilight mess - which wasn't combatants vs pacifists in any case).

    Vis a vis Cyrene, which is managed by a pacifistic core group. Its combatant population, already small to begin with, has only gotten smaller and smaller.

    I mean, it's far from being a scientifically accurate study, but there is evidence to suggest that, in the face-off between combatants vs. pacifists, one is less pleasant than the other, to the other.
     <3 
  • edited June 2017
    I gotta be honest, I think the big problem here is an unwillingness for the "pacifist " side of the village to trust that the volunteers behind the God roles want to help us have fun. I would imagine that if they had approached Gaia respectfully, that they might have added some great things to the game together. Instead, the volunteer was driven away. That is not the fault of the VOLUNTEER nor the god role...
  • Linton said:

    @Alrena Much as I like the idea that the division will heal themselves if everyone 'get to know each other' and 'find common ground', I am not confident that that in itself will work. To find common ground, they have to be and feel that they are at the same level first.

      

    This is the same argument that was used back then. The main problem here is that your method is to completely widen the division to the point where there are two very separate organisations, with entirely different goals, keeping contact to a minimum. That's dividing things further and will really only result in a continuous tug-of-war between the pro-peace and pro-war factions, one oppressing the other in turn.

    Feeling like you are at the same level is a terribly subjective thing. I once asked a member of the Kin what it would take for him to feel accepted in Eleusis. He answered he could not think of any way that would make him feel accepted. If someone doesn't want to feel accepted, if they don't want to feel like they are "at the same level", then there is nothing you can do to force them to feel otherwise. Feelings are terribly difficult like that.

    You're not confident that my method will work, however it's actually the first step to achieving any form of understanding. As long as the "others" remain this mysterious group that you actually know nothing about except what your group tells you about them, you'll never feel at the same level. You'll be oppressing them or feel oppressed by them. Sometimes even both. 

    Getting to know each other, you'll learn a lot about their views and see that you DO have a lot more in common than you think. That's how you start finding policies that, even if they're not what you want, they're at least acceptable to most people. But you have to give and take a little too. Start with accepting that the Viridian Charter doesn't mean you have to be extremists.


    tl;dr: we can keep debating, but the bottom line is that I think Eleusis needs to get to know each other as individuals, and certainly not divide themselves further by pushing a misunderstood charter to one House only and leaving the other without any guidance.
    image
  • What about a third House, so it's less "us vs. them" ? Or would that not solve anything.
  • Cailin said:
    What about a third House, so it's less "us vs. them" ? Or would that not solve anything.
    The problem is giving meaning to this third House. I'm not sure it would solve much, just as the Druids joining Eleusis didn't solve things either. It's likely the third House would just become half of the Heartwood Kin and you'd have either two Kins vs one Scions. Or at worst, a three-way division, if people who dislike both the Kin and the Scions band together in the third House.

    Not to mention I couldn't figure out a way to give a third House a good meaning, when the Scions are already "Focused on outside influences on Nature" and the Heartwood Kin are about "Understanding, tending and protecting Nature from within". It didn't leave much room for a third.
    image
  • Cailin said:
    What about a third House, so it's less "us vs. them" ? Or would that not solve anything.
    We had that before renaisance without there being much of a difference.
    image
  • Mathilda said:

    Vis a vis Cyrene, which is managed by a pacifistic core group.
    Well, I think Cyrene kinda gets a free pass on this one. After all, it IS the city of peace-- the city for people who are tired of fighting. And who knows-- if they had allowed forestal classes, maybe Eleusis wouldn't have as big a problem? Because these pacifist forestals who just want to hug trees could go live in Cyrene. I dunno, just a thought.
  • AhmetAhmet Wherever I wanna be
    Peace =/= neutrality. Go away.
    Huh. Neat.
  • Eleusis needs to have a Circle of Life discussion.

    Everyone in the city sits down in somewhere big and full of trees and airs their concerns and thoughts. 

    Jeez.
  • Verquisse said:
    Eleusis needs to have a Circle of Life discussion.

    Everyone in the city sits down in somewhere big and full of trees and airs their concerns and thoughts. 

    Jeez.
    We do this once a year. :D We call it the village meeting!
    image
  • edited June 2017
    Rangor said:
    Verquisse said:
    Eleusis needs to have a Circle of Life discussion.

    Everyone in the city sits down in somewhere big and full of trees and airs their concerns and thoughts. 

    Jeez.
    We do this once a year. :D We call it the village meeting!
    But has it worked, though?

    Gotta get to the nitty gritty. No censorship! No hiding! NO MEERRRCCCYYYY!!!
  • edited June 2017
    Verquisse said:
    Rangor said:
    Verquisse said:
    Eleusis needs to have a Circle of Life discussion.

    Everyone in the city sits down in somewhere big and full of trees and airs their concerns and thoughts. 

    Jeez.
    We do this once a year. :D We call it the village meeting!
    But has it worked, though?

    Gotta get to the nitty gritty. No censorship! No hiding! NO MEERRRCCCYYYY!!!
    It's not gonna work. We've got a few of oldies that's as stubborn as they get, and if they aren't oldies they are new incarnation of the same oldies. They very rarely give their opinion on matters in public when it is asked for. You basically have to drag it out of them if you want to hear their view on matters. There aren't many people that cause the divide, some of them are gone, some still remain. Mostly people get along just fine.
    image
  • Lenn said:
    Hi! Debating IC politics and philosophy is more fun IC, so I'll talk about OOC things OOCly instead. :)

    Daeir: Not everyone logs in for conflict. I see this attitude on the forum a lot, and it's actually rather unpleasant to read. For a more blatant example, see Atalkez's post below that I'm also responding to, where he implies the only thing that matters is PvP, which is both insulting and blatantly absurd.

    Atalkez: Other games are better at PvP. Sorry, but it's undeniably true. There are just so many better options. I come to Achaea for what it's actually got that's rare, and I suspect many do the same: immersive roleplay backed with a large enough population to enjoy it. The sandbox nature helps a lot too, of course.

    One of Achaea's biggest selling points is its playerbase. Please stop insulting other players, saying they have to be stamped out to improve the game. In a room full of people trying to have fun, please stop trying to shout "NO! YOU ARE DOING FUN WRONG! STOP IT!" ^^;
    You are welcome to come to Achaea for whatever you find fun. However, plenty of us actually keep coming back here entirely -because- of the PvP. You are welcome to find the PvP in other games more fun, but personally, I find it difficult to find any other PvP system that even approaches the complexity of Achaea's. Don't get me wrong, I have plenty of fun with PvP on WoW and other such games; I get burned out by Achaea periodically as well. None of this changes the fact that Achaea does PvP way different, and some would certainly argue better, than most of its competitors.

  • Cailin said:
    Nazihk said:

    Pacifism only means something when it is an actual choice with an actual cost. If you can't fight, then you're not a pacifist. You're just a wuss.

    Okay this makes no sense. As someone who doesn't really like combat, but fights anyways, I definitely made a choice. I made a choice to try to learn combat. So called "Pacifists" make the same choice-- but to not learn combat. And not necessarily because they're scared, but simply because they don't like it.

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with disliking combat. Only when certain people extend that to disliking combatants. (Ugh)

    (PS sorry for the wonky quote boxes)
    A choice to avoid fighting only carries weight if you could also choose to fight. Without that, it's not really a choice.
  • Nazihk said:
    A choice to avoid fighting only carries weight if you could also choose to fight. Without that, it's not really a choice.
    I see what you're getting at, but the bar for meaningful contribution to something like a team endeavour is really not that high. Insinuating that people who choose pacifism in a videogame do so because they're helpless within the context of said game is really very silly.
  • Hi again! Alrena stated some very good points. I'll only add that seeing it as two sides won't help much either. I don't think there are two distinct sides to begin with, that's just an illusion or simplification. It's just many individuals who can remember different bad things, and sometimes act on that. Seeing some of them as enemies may only add more bad things!

    Of course, Lenn isn't necessarily always better. She's still growing and maturing as a person too. :)

    Mathilda: I know those players exist too, trust me. I suppose my only real response is that repeating a wrong doesn't make it right, and making enemies out of arbitrary groups for a few bad eggs within them adds to strife rather than reducing it. It's possible you only meant to point out that my words extend to many types of players, and they certainly do, but that only strengthens my point, it doesn't weaken it at all, I think. ^^

    Oh, and slightly off-topic, but to Daeir and Nicola (though I'm sure she knows this all too well already): Gods are great for organisations, but this fact is by design. Some players especially enjoy interactions with Gods, but others just do not like it as much. It's a sad and sometimes unfair reality for the volunteer that not all players will appreciate roleplaying with them equally, but it is a reality.

    Because it's a reality, and because people who like those interactions already can join orders, not to mention the two heavily theocratic cities, is it any wonder the remaining cities have plenty of people who don't want too much divine oversight at the city level? Something to consider might be that the game already has as many theocracies as its player-base is currently able to support.

    PS: Atalkez: My apologies, rereading my previous post, I came across as a bit extreme by saying other games undeniably do PvP better. It's a bit subjective to argue that. I mainly meant that you can find most of the elements Achaea combat draws on in other games (not just MMOs, I'm even including boardgames here!), often with less barriers too.

    It's "undeniable" (per my original poorly worded thoughts) that Achaea has a lot of things which make it hard for just anyone to enjoy its combat mechanics, and player skill is relatively minor among them. Scripting requirements, constant rebalances and other changes, pay-to-win factors, barriers to initial entry, text spam as its only native UI element, a large (and still growing!) pool of classes and abilities to learn and keep track of, and even just that it's necessarily tied to roleplay. Those are a few of the bigger restrictions in mind.

    And PS to Nazikh: I play a pacifist. ^^ To be honest, it's a really cool idea to be the pacifist who could totally beat up anyone in the room but who decides not to. However, in Achaea, it helps a lot having levels to avoid dying first (Lenn-style pacifism does not permit hunting for experience or wealth!), and avoiding violence means less practice too. That said, Lenn can usually beat up other beginners, so she's not totally worthless in a fight anymore. :3 Just... mostly worthless. >_>
  • edited June 2017
    Lenn said:
    Hi again! Meow!

    Name: Lenn
    Full name: Lenn Longshanks, Court Shadow
    City: (none)
    House: Cij
    Level: 76
    Class: Depthswalker
    Mob kills: 8
    Player kills: 18
    Xp rank: 912
    Explorer rank: 478

    Meow

    Those 26 deaths want to talk to you.

    /Derail
  • Gosh, you make a mistake just 27 times, and people never let it go!
  • MelodieMelodie Port Saint Lucie, Florida
    edited June 2017
    Linton said:
    @Melodie I am not optimistic too about waiting for people to accept the idea that Nature Gods are manifestation of Nature and therefore we should obey them as they can only be right. (I personally do not agree, as the Gods in Achaea are fallible, like Gaia actually went mad(canon) at one point in time. More importantly, if everyone just follow a God's mind, it would feel like there are no characters that can stand out in this story that is Achaea. However all this is irrelevant to the subject and just my personal views). I do not believe the rift can wait for this to happen.
    Yes, I know my history. Gods are not infallible, but how does that make them any less trustworthy than another mortal? 

    What I'm saying is, this rift isn't going to disappear until that mends. It's practically impossible, because it's a very core function not only of the game, but of the faction as a whole. Even in Mhaldor, which is a theocracy for Sartan, there is an extremely diverse crowd of people. You can still have that diversity, and stand out, while still revering the gods in Eleusis for the important roles they play (note: revering does not mean worship). You all have even more chance and opportunity at diversity, but you still must acknowledge your gods for what they are, and realize that just maybe, from an IC point of view, they might have an idea of what they're talking about and their opinions could probably be pretty important. You're confusing taking into consideration an ages-old immortal's word for "obey at any cost", which is exactly why I was pointing out Gaia did not want a theocracy. Of course that's not going to be how it works. But at the moment, you're telling your gods their opinions of what they are made from matters for nothing, especially compared to your own opinions.

    From the way most Eleusians treat their gods, I feel like they use an OOC mindset, which is "this is just an admin volunteer with different opinions to me I have to deal with. I will marginalize them as much as possible so that my word is above their own because -I- know Nature better than some new person," which is an incredibly toxic view. You can still absolutely run a player org while still respecting the gods you have. Every other faction does it, in fact! This is a uniquely Eleusian problem, and you will be stuck with no volunteer to help you if you keep this up, while also keeping this divide firmly in place.
    And I love too                                                                          Be still, my indelible friend
    That love soon might end                                                         You are unbreaking
    And be known in its aching                                                      Though quaking
    Shown in this shaking                                                             Though crazy
    Lately of my wasteland, baby                                                 That's just wasteland, baby
  • In reading the comments from the pacifist camp, as it were, I've noticed that a lot of the language is reactive; waiting on things to happen, hoping things change, hoping people's point of view changes, and so on. 

    Passivity and reactionism will rarely get you results, let alone results you want. Regardless of your point of view, you have to make things happen. 

    I will say that a lot of this back and forth shows that the pacifists seem to feel something is being taken away from them, as if their desires were the established standard, and other people are here to change their game. Treating people (pc's or gods) like they're here to steal your show is fundamentally flawed. Factions don't belong to anyone, and the people pushing the story forward have, in my eyes, more of a right to the steering wheel than people who want to focus on individual pursuits and interactions above everything else (individualism is not something I condemn, play the game however you want. But individualism as government policy has always been harmful to factions).
  • edited June 2017
    Reyson said:
    Passivity and reactionism will rarely get you results, let alone results you want. Regardless of your point of view, you have to make things happen. 

    The problem is, this isn't true at all. If what you want is for things not to change, and for your faction not to interact with the broader game world, which seems to be how plenty of people feel, then you -don't- want anything to happen.

    Really, I think this is why we end up with so many cases of what @Daeir talks about, where large portions of the playerbase that eschew any sort of conflict with the broader world end up in power in so many places. The people who don't want anything to happen can use the power they have to slow things down, and then when the people who actually want to see things happen get frustrated and leave, it just gives that first group more power, until they completely control the faction.

    No matter who should have more of a right to the steering wheel, the game mechanics don't care. All you need to do to stay in power in a democracy is to get votes, and driving out the people who disagree with you is just as effective as actually making interesting things happen, for that.
  • A big issue here is that the 'pacifists' spin a fantasy where they're the poor, oppressed victims. Even here, Linton spins a weird alternate reality where the Sciones rule Eleusis because of the charter. The Speaker and 2 or 3 (not sure) of the hierophants are Heartwood, what exactly is this oppressed minority business?

    The issue is that people think the heartwood kin are meant to be pacifists, rather than meaningful contributors. Diplomacy isn't actually the Heartwood's goal any more than combat is, in theory.
  • I mean, sure, but Eleusis is fresh off bitching up a storm over getting stomped because they kicked their fighters out, to the point people were allegedly quitting achaea or whatever, so that doesn't seem like a desirable outcome, but who knows with some of the people in charge there. 
  • edited June 2017
    The stance the pacifist majority is taking isn't technically wrong, given that there aren't any "rights" or "wrongs" in a player-driven game - just frowned upon because most other factions have a common goal with a more worldly impact. 

    It's sort of a shame that Eleusis has a lot of potential to be a faction with a meaningful impact on the Achaean world via a hardcore ideology that actively threatens to bring ruin to cities for the advancement of Nature - but is essentially lost when the majority becomes inward-focused, not unlike becoming a Nature-themed Cyrene.

    Significant progress was made on enforcing that ideology for awhile, thanks to all the work that Gaia and Alrena (plus a few others like Ellodin/Rangor put in) so Eleusis could remain relevant on the bigger stage but I guess that dwindled and it's back to square one again with the exodus/dormancy of the Gaians/Scions.

    I was scratching my head when I logged in again after a month or two when I saw all the shenanigans and elections, then I was like "o fck" then left. I think Hashan is falling somewhere along these lines too, where Darkness could be the main theme but instead, most players aren't interested.

    [ SnB PvP Guide | Link ]

    [ Runewarden Sparring Videos | Link ]
  • edited June 2017
    The best solution, clearly, would be to bring forestal classes back to Cyrene. Cyrene works with the ritual/rp focused side of the city to tear out the anchor and begin regrowing parts of the Propasian forest, and in exchange, Cyrene gets forestals.

    It's clearly the perfect solution. All the people who want pacifism and zero conflict ever can move to Cyrene, leaving Eleusis for the people who actually want to do something, while those pacifist players would be positively engaged with the world compared to the Cyrenian average, as well as the classes that everyone wants back.

    Long-term roleplay for the roleplay focused in Eleusis, less pacifists dragging that faction down, more pacifists in the city that's already dead, and I'd get to go sentinel. It'd be a win-win for everyone!

  • edited June 2017
    Keorin said:
    The best solution, clearly, would be to bring forestal classes back to Cyrene. Cyrene works with the ritual/rp focused side of the city to tear out the anchor and begin regrowing parts of the Propasian forest, and in exchange, Cyrene gets forestals.

    It's clearly the perfect solution. All the people who want pacifism and zero conflict ever can move to Cyrene, leaving Eleusis for the people who actually want to do something, while those pacifist players would be positively engaged with the world compared to the Cyrenian average, as well as the classes that everyone wants back.

    Long-term roleplay for the roleplay focused in Eleusis, less pacifists dragging that faction down, more pacifists in the city that's already dead, and I'd get to go sentinel. It'd be a win-win for everyone!

    Where's my freakin Sentinel?

    But not a bad solution. Runs the risk of a Cyrene vs Eleusis, however, if one huge clique moves and leaves the other clique with the actual village. They'll still feel entitled to being "my forestal RP is correct, you filthy combatants. Get the hell out my village."

    If they'll move at all. Which I highly doubt because even if Cyrene goes pro-Nature (which is not Neutral whatsoever, as seen by Mhaldor vs Eleusis), the whole Nature gig is what Eleusis is supposed to be.

    Even if the two major cliques are fighting over what the meaning of their org is.

    As @Laniara tried to explain to Verq (I got it after a while of thinking btw, Verq is still lost because "why the hell don't they have direction?"), Eleusis needs to know what Eleusis is. 

    They don't know what they are as whole past "we're protectors of Nature and the natural order, but what is the correct way to do that, if making cities of stone is a mortal's natural order, but it's messing with nature which is bad BUT that's the natural order BUT it's harming nature, man!!" Which, obviously, is confusing as heck. And so you have the combatants who think combat (which is what all the other cool cats are doing) is the correct way, but the pacifists attempting to be pacifists AND combat the hurting of nature WITHOUT hurting things. 

    They need to find a middle ground they're all happy with, which is hard, but not as hard as it sounds.
  • No factional classes for unaligned cities pls
  • edited June 2017
    Sorry for the double post, but ran out if edit time. 

    Anyway, it's acceptance, which I'm pretty sure @Alrena already pretty much said. Eleusians are focusing too much on being individuals instead of what they are - a VILLAGE built to protect AND nurture Nature itself. It doesn't need to be a theocracy like Targ or Mhaldor to function as well those two do. They just need to accept each other. They need to learn to cooperate. They need to be a TEAM. 

    I play football, so it is really easy to see when a team is too focused on themselves. It can't function unless they look to their left and their right and realize that they're brothers and sisters fighting and not-fighting for the same thing. Why are they forcing their ideals on each other (pacifists saying combatants need more pacifism and combatants saying pacifists need more combatant-ism), when they should both be equally correct? 

    I mean, sure, the Viridian Charter can be interpreted in many different ways, and shoved to one side and deprived from another. But reading it, it seems like it should be interpreted differently by each character. It doesn't say HOW they need to do it or who is doing it right - it just says DO IT. And interpreting it in different ways is beautiful and great and grand, but not so much when you try to force your own thinking upon someone else. 

    But tl;Dr- Eleusis is a mass of individuals rather than a single entity as they should be ("Look, extermers! Quick, combatants protect the pacifists and throw the bad guys out as the non-fighters rejuv and replant!") and no sort of city swapping or anything will fix that. They need to accept each other and use each other's strengths while covering each other's weaknesses. 

    /forumRP because that's all supposed to be done IC. No mechanics, no new skills, no anything extra. Just people need to stop being assholes to each other.
  • I hope this discussion is good reference for those in position to make changes to mend the disunity in Eleusis.

    We can say all we want on how one side is right and the other wrong. But at the end of the day, things are what they are. People are what they are. We have to work with that. The divide is real, not theory.

    From my first post in this thread, I have asserted that the divide is not one of non-combatants vs combatants as this axis exists in every faction. The underlying cause is more about how people might feel they are not given room to exist with the continuation of their RP or take part in matters of the world  because of this -unique circumstances- they are in. This however is just my POV.

    My POV:

    Implementing the Renaissance in Eleusis, two houses, the Scions and Heartwood are formed. All citizens - members of both houses, are also required to abide/swear oaths to the Viridian Charter. The Charter -matches- the ideals of the Scions: basically anti-civilization and expansionist Nature.

    Scions will have its own non-combatants, giving lectures, doing rituals(like the blood ritual in Targ) that espouse the Charter which is supposed to identify Eleusis from that point on after the Ren. Doing so they are also expressing their own house Ideals since these ideals are identical with the Charter. From here we can simplify the situation into Scions = Eleusis.

    Where then is the Heartwood's place in the village or the world? It acts as a retirement home for those who still clings to pre-Ren Eleusis. A compromise made during the planning stages of the Ren, in an attempt to accommodate both sides since an anti-civilization Eleusis never has popular support but was implemented anyway.

    Problem now is this retirement home is huge, the biggest house in Sapience, frequently a few fold bigger than that of the Scions -till this day-.

    Sure Heartwood members can become Hierophants, even Speakers. What they cannot or feel they cannot do is overturn the situation where they too can -truly- become part of post-Ren Eleusis, since they supposed have sworn themselves over to the Charter which again matches the ideals of the Scions and Heartwood members are not Scions. They do not hold the ideals of the Scions or they would have joined them.

    Heartwood is left out of the policy making process that determines Eleusis' place in the world. The most they can do is to turn inwards and do their own rituals and lectures praising Nature and what not. Sure alot of people don't mind this situation as long as they can do their own thing. They probably don't even read the news too closely. But there exists people who wishes to break out of this giant retirement home.

    @Alrena My view on the prerequisites on a healing of the disunity:

    For the two houses to smile and shake hands with each other, they must be able to feel that they are each other's equals.

    Right now,  Scions = Eleusis, since Scions' ideals = Eleusis' ideals(Viridian Charter)

    Not only are the Heartwood left out, they too have to swear/abide by the Charter so they are made to feel that they too have to be Scions even though they are not.

    This is not a relationship of equals!

    My proposal to move the Viridian Charter over to Scions' househall would change this unequal relationship. And since the Charter and Scions' ideals matches so well, no work needs to be done!

    Such a move will not in your words, push the two houses away from each other. That is already done in the design process during the Ren when the two houses were formed. No blaming here, hindsight is 20/20, and compromises needed to be made then with the deadline of the Ren.

    This change I proposed will shift Eleusis from a 2 party but with only 1 party dictating policy(since policy is locked in place - anti-civilization) to one where both parties will have a chance.

    Though I cannot say the disunity in Eleusis will be gone with this move, I only hope that the divide will become one that is more professional where both sides can compete in the open, and less need for passive aggressiveness or shady methods.

    It would be like... a bad example here - having both democrats and republicans and only one side holding the majority in the government and thus dictating policy at any one time, which is how a 2 party system works.

    We cannot just hope that the disunity in Eleusis will go away. Or hope that Heartwood Kin will be happy with their place. Or for people to not be themselves. All this time, it has not happened. Blaming them is not productive too. Or delineating people to one side or the other and them saying one side is right the other wrong.

    Another way for me to say this: WHOEVER can mend the disunity in Eleusis is RIGHT, no matter which side they are on.

    @Melodie What you said makes sense but I feel they apply more to religion that cannot be seen or touched. Like Evil, Good, Chaos, Darkness. Nature is unique in a way because it can be seen. it can be touched, it is everywhere around us. People will form their own relationship with Nature as a result. You can tell them they are wrong,.. that Nature =/= nature.......... but it's not going to work. And if it is not going to work, we should move on and try something else no?
Sign In or Register to comment.