Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

I'm posting this because I think it needs a bit of re-iteration:

Web entry on Gruumsh wrote:His primary foe is Corellon Lorethian and also Lloth. His ally is Malar.

Can I just say, it irritates me, when people play their characters together, to the point of spiting their faith, when they are OOC buddies, or get OOC benefit to doing so. Ignorance of an emnity between two faiths is one thing, but when characters are ICly, and OOCly, told by the manager of the faith, and they take advantage of OOC knowledge, that the faith manager won't be logging for a while, and the deity's player no longer logs anymore, so they can do what they want to do... why bother being a member of a faith?

The point is... it's not just a matter of obedience, it's a matter of being an Orc faithful to Gruumsh. The bulk of the Orcs are not just going to start cozying up to a priestess of Lolth, and spiting their priesthood. ICly, your deity can be watching you at any minute; ICly, an Orc would be eaten if they ticked off Gruumsh badly enough; ICly, an orc who is devoted to Gruumsh is going to HATE the people and faiths that canon says they hate. Go against that, and there's no possible IC way to justify it; it's plain and simple OOC networking.

I know in the Orcs' case, Ooma has tried to keep it all IC as far as who they're keeping company with. But since the faithful consider her words only worth paying attention to when she hasn't posted a note that she'll be away for a while, maybe there should be some immortal involvement in the absence of Gruumsh's player.

I'm in agreement. I prefer that players take the time to observe the tenets of the faith they are rping in. Regardless if a imm is active or inactive in a faith. Someone is always watching and looking for appropriate rp or a case to create or evaluate rp in response to a preexisting one.

Handle it IC?

Two OOCs don't make an IC.

Don't you think it's a little hypocritical of you to complain about ooc friendships striking ic shouldn't-be friendships because you're close to the faith manager of Gruumsh ooc, and want an imm to handle it in said fm's absence because the people aren't listening to the fm ic? o.O

Don't get me wrong, I agree. Drow are pansy elf, Lloth and Gruumsh faith enemies. But that's all ic.

I can't name how many times I've had to deal with people not listening to me over faith stuff and immortals not stepping in to help... How many times people have seen I'm on an alt and took that time to do something bleh. How many times I've seen only as an alt something bad and can't use ooc info. How many times people have blatently slapped a fm of mine or something of the like that the god would not likely let happen. It's part of being a faith manager, not every faithful is going to be perfect. That's IC to handle. People aren't listening? Use your damn command(responsibly), there's a reason it was put in.

Spiteful answers and blind amalgams between using OOC friendship in-game or out-of-game/on the forums do not seem particularly helpful here.

In this case, I would think it should indeed be up to the FM to

1) make her point across to the character in question; then, if it fails to change anything,

2) use "damn", possibly several times, and maybe add other IC punishments (order others of the faith to shun/hunt the character); then, if it still fails,

3) report it all in an application to fkapplications (it's not a complaint, since it's not OOC but IC).

Mele wrote:Don't you think it's a little hypocritical of you to complain about ooc friendships striking ic shouldn't-be friendships because you're close to the faith manager of Gruumsh ooc, and want an imm to handle it in said fm's absence because the people aren't listening to the fm ic?

No, I don't think it's hypocritical at all.

I am quite consistent and firm with my opinion on anything when it comes to blatant crossing of the faith and race lines among those who should be mortal enemies. I mentioned the orcs, because that was the last instance I found out about in-game, and triggered my post, but, since it's brought up to question that I'm only upset because of the Orcs, I could bring up others that irk me that I have no personal connection to whatsoever.

Relationships, both IC and OOC, seem to often trump IC faith. When considered that a person would be so devoted to a god that they would become a "follower" of that god, one would think they would have enough of their own dedication to that, to not want to consciously step on their own Master's, or Mistress' toes. Again, if it's a case of ignorance of the faith, then that's the fault of the faith management for not conveying the faith to the followers. But when made aware of the tenets, and the sacrifices one makes to be named follower of a faith, that becomes a question of where is a player simply casting character into the wind.

Just really one thing I would like to say here

It seems that many of the people here expect the players of each and every faith to play the exemplary member of that faith. That they should all have the same values, love who they should love, and hate who they should hate. But I think people should remember, people are not their gods and I think a god would know that. Just because a faith member does not agree completely with a certain part of that faith, does not mean they are a terrible and horrible member of that faith, nor does it mean they are deserving of their god coming down and smiting them for that.

None of us are the god we follow, and I think with the amount of followers in each faith around the FR world, that a bit of deviation from what is the "perfect faith member" is alright and even a bit expected.

Just so everyone knows, this is in general and not meaning to be directed toward any one person.

I can't say much to that, but I can say that faith managers are expected to be the mouthpiece of their imms. Although it is difficult sometimes to follow that rp, it is what is expected of them. I could see honestly, someone being removed from that position for not following in line with their chosen patron. That is however my personal opinion on the matter at hand.

It seems that many of the people here expect the players of each and every faith to play the exemplary member of that faith. That they should all have the same values, love who they should love, and hate who they should hate.

This is probably an example of a proper higher tier member of a faith in rp.

Goodness, I cannot begin to count the number of times Nysan has ticked of his goddess or gotten into arguements with fellow faith members, even the FM, because he is not the 'model' faith member and did something questionable over the years. By all means, I am not agreeing with consistant disobeying of IC 'rules of faith', especially regular freindly relations with faith enemies. However, perfection is not a true mortal trait so some faith-conflicts will arise.

The OOC conflicting IC behavior situation should be solved IC or emails however...not posted on forums, which merely creates more conflicts.

I believe an important distinction should be made between cases where a PC is acting against the will of their God, knows it, and is at least a little nervous about it, but in a given instance puts some other principle (or personal character trait) before faith canon, and RP's accordingly; and the situation where a player uses their PC to help another player without any accord to the IC aspects involved. I don't know which applies here; Raona has been involved in with Graf in the past and has tried (and continues to try) to respond to it ICly.

I don't understand the assertion that situations where Faith/Immly involvement is called for - but do not occur because of OOC factors - should not be raised OOCly. I do concur that this is probably best done in a non-public venue. (Though I'm totally throwing a stone from a glass house on that point, having whinged publicly on a related issue myself.)

In the Hunter's Blade trilogy, there are a number of faithfuls of Lolth that work with a union of Orc tribes, including Gruumsh's avatar. The Avatar doesn't kill the priestess, or any of the others. Just because they hate each other doesn't mean they won't work together if it suits both of their needs.

Trying to make a drow-orc halfbreed, that I would consider blasphemy.
Working together to advance each individuals goal, in my opinion, is not.

Glim wrote:It seems that many of the people here expect the players of each and every faith to play the exemplary member of that faith. That they should all have the same values, love who they should love, and hate who they should hate. But I think people should remember, people are not their gods and I think a god would know that.

None of us are the god we follow, and I think with the amount of followers in each faith around the FR world, that a bit of deviation from what is the "perfect faith member" is alright and even a bit expected.

I have to admit. The things addressed here by Glim are the main things that have irked me quite a bit. Please remember that some Gods are even vain enough to slaughter followers of theirs who too greatly emulate their God.

Gods are just as jealous and possessive as mortals. Even as the mouthpiece of your God, you are to teach. That is not to say you should emulate your God.

There have been a number of times when I thought to myself, "You know, Selveem is getting a little too close to what Tempus may see himself as. I should foster some of those key differences (such as celibacy) and make them a bit more prevelant." I have often been surprised that some of the ways he conducts himself (as I have, in the past, tried to deeply emulate Tempus in Selveem) has not caused a bit of that wariness described in Faiths and Pantheons.

I think that differences of opinion even within religion are an important if not integral part of FK and FR alike. I'm not a big fan of drones. Think about it in movie terms. Would you all go see a movie where everyone on one faction acted, dressed, and presented themselves exactly as King Arthur while the opposing faction all exactly as Mordred? Boring. *nods off*

Also, please remember just because a Sharran is moonlighting with a Selunite, that doesn't mean they may not have their own personal goals. Perhaps there is a bit of Spy vs Spy going on or even they are attempting to corrupt/exorcise the other. Just because you may not be privy to the details of the RP does not mean they are acting OOC or buddy-buddy because of their OOC relationship.

It seems there are very many people quick to judge other people's RP when most RP is subjective. Sure, there may be poor roleplayers, but as previously noted by someone else in another post: everyone starts that way.

A few points I'd like to make to re-center the discussion.

• You will never be punished OOCly for choices you make ICly. You are a follower of Tempus and decide to ally with assassins and/or blackmailers who know no honour in combat? That's your choice as the player guiding the character and it's not something you will get a strike, be banned from the game or be otherwise punished OOCly for.
• You have no control over the IC reactions to your behaviour. Let's be consistent here... you can't defend the "I want to be able to play however I want" stance while at the same time forcing characters who disagree with your behaviour to not react to it. In other words, while you will not be punished OOCly, you might have to face the IC consequences of your choice, and that might include being chastised, damned, or even expulsed from the faith. For example, if you are a follower of Mystra and decide to get all friendly with a Helmite, and your faith manager or deity does not like that, they are free to lower your faith rank/chastise/damn/ban you from the faith. There's no reason why FMs/deities wouldn't be as free in their choices as you are.
• The IC faith is in the control of two types of characters: the Faith Managers and the players behind the deity. You can disagree with them, but they still hold the power in the church. If either choose to chastise/damn/ban you, they surely can do it. For example, if you are an orc and go all friendly with drow and your Faith Manager does not like it, and if after being chastised you continue to do so, then you might get further damned/banned/changed into a spider/whatever.

I wanted to say in response to not playing the perfect member of that faith,
that some faiths specially those who are deeply rooted in the culture of a specific race are well aware of whom are their worst enemies since they have grown listening how "bad" have been with them.

Elves, Drows and Orcs (and others as well) grow learning history or listening histories about his race and before they become adults by the standards of their race they are fairly well aware of who are their enemies.

So if a Elf/Drow/Orc hangs around with a racial enemy is likely to know what is he doing and the possible consequences that it could bring.

Dalvyn wrote: In other words, while you will not be punished OOCly, you might have to face the IC consequences of your choice, and that might include being chastised, damned, or even expulsed from the faith. .[/list]

Or, public execution....

I'm trying to understand where exactly this MUD is headed - do you want things more 'realistic' or 'fantastic?' No offense intended, but using your example I find it more 'comic'-bound than anything else.

Characters are just as free to make their own decisions. Because an Imm or two decides "hey, you know..... maaaaaaybe this character shouldn't be hanging out with this person" doesn't mean the entire MUD would suddenly question the honor/integrity of said character.

RP is subject to scrutiny by many. As are the interpretations of the guidelines of the faith. I'm not going to go into the details of your example as I do completely disagree with you and find your opinion contrary to specific wordings found within the Faiths and Pantheons book for FR. Further, I don't believe 'grey areas' should be cause for 'IC punishment' unless /specifically/ stated in the God's helpfile as a 'house rule.' To me, that's just as ignorant as slapping a tourist because they don't speak your country's language.

Selveem wrote: To me, that's just as ignorant as slapping a tourist because they don't speak your country's language.

Wait...people are not supposed to do that?

Alvirin wrote:Elves, Drows and Orcs (and others as well) grow learning history or listening histories about his race and before they become adults by the standards of their race they are fairly well aware of who are their enemies.

So if a Elf/Drow/Orc hangs around with a racial enemy is likely to know what is he doing and the possible consequences that it could bring.

That is true: ICly, all elves/orcs/drow would have attended to several-hour-long masses and religious gatherings where they would have been told everything about their patron deities, so they couldn't pretend just ignoring that X is a faith enemy. The same does not hold for players though (who have not been locked in a room and flogged till they are able to repeat the text from Faith & Avatars from memory).

And I believe that it was the spirit behind the first post here: to make sure that all players who have an orc do know about their standard faith enemies.

I'm going to agree with Dalvyn completely and I applaud his use of terminology. He has summed up what I meant exactly and in a way that is understandable, ic actions have ic reactions. If you choose to do something contrary to your affiliation, race or faith you should do so in the knowledge that it is contrary. However I will concede that everyone makes mistakes. Warnings and chances are better than automatic ic reprocussions in everything, we work to make an icly enjoyable experience and not to punish outright.

I'm trying to understand where exactly this MUD is headed - do you want things more 'realistic' or 'fantastic?' No offense intended, but using your example I find it more 'comic'-bound than anything else.

I think that the direction of fk is and has always been towards an rp mud set in the vien of the Forgotten Realms setting. However we are not forgotten realms, we are Fk in the sense we adhere to our own loreset as much as to the core rules to create a unique experience. I do not understand what you mean by comic.

Characters are just as free to make their own decisions. Because an Imm or two decides "hey, you know..... maaaaaaybe this character shouldn't be hanging out with this person" doesn't mean the entire MUD would suddenly question the honor/integrity of said character.

I would agree, but I would not fault another pc for questioning a character's honour or integrity if they do something ic against their faith, alingment or race and are found out. It does not mean the entire mud will begin a torrented campaign against said pc but it may mean that several pc's might be miffed icly. And once again I stress that it is an ic result of ic actions nothing more or less.

RP is subject to scrutiny by many. As are the interpretations of the guidelines of the faith. I'm not going to go into the details of your example as I do completely disagree with you and find your opinion contrary to specific wordings found within the Faiths and Pantheons book for FR. Further

Once again, we are not the official campaign setting, we are a mud that utilizes the world and ideas of the setting adjusted to meet the needs of the mud as seen fit for play. So specific wordings or player guides may not suffice as rock hard examples of how to manage rp in the forgotten realms mud. I personally consider them standards or guiding points when it comes to rp, things that help you somewhat. The rest is learned or adjusted ingame.

Further, I don't believe 'grey areas' should be cause for 'IC punishment' unless /specifically/ stated in the God's helpfile as a 'house rule.' To me, that's just as ignorant as slapping a tourist because they don't speak your country's language.

It depends on what you did, how you did it, how you continue to do it and the opinion of your deity in question. It depends not only on your rp but their rp as well, how they choose to conduct themselves or police their followers. In my experience you sometimes have to adjust and grow into a role if your imm or admin requests it, other times there is compromise or understanding. I've personally learned to weigh and/or discuss situations before reacting, but the real trick is to decide what response is appropriate to certain ic actions. The main objective is to creat an interesting rp session without creating an uncomfortable or irreversable situation. A light touch.

However as always if you feel vicitimized ooc you can email complaints to voice your concern. I once again second Dalvyn's post about ic actions only having ic reprocussions as they fit, that is a good goal. That also flows into ic rewards for ic actions, not everything is a punishment, if you observe a good line of rp or do your best and walk with what rp you have as you can, things work out very well in my experience.

On a lighter note...

Whether or not you get slapped in a country for not speaking the language might very well depend on what you say...

One of Angel's friends, who is first generation American went to live for a while in her mother's home town in Angiers, France. And she pointed out from her experience learning French that it is VERY close to making a mistake, when you want to say "Thank you, very much", to saying, in so many words, "Thank you, nice arse."

And I'm certain that Christophe will roundly correct if I am wrong with this tale

Wow, this sure seems to be a topic that brings out a lot of anger. It would probably be best if we all addressed this topic as it stands, giving our points of view, and not let the emotional part of the discussion get out of hand. We can't expect every player to agree with every other player, and logically then we can't expect every player to agree with every imm decision. I think Dalvyn's list sums up the imm position rather well. Giving logical reasons to deviate from that position might result in a tweak of the admins view of things. However, every tweak that makes one person/group happy will likely upset another person/group. It is all about balance and I think we have a good balance in this area. Let's face it, the people with the IC power (FMs on the player side) will face criticism for their running of their faiths. We also should note that people want to do what they choose and don't like getting caught IC with their hands in the cookie jar by those who have the power to slap those hands. Accordingly, I find the following two statements to be contradictory:

Selveem:

Characters are just as free to make their own decisions.

Further, I don't believe 'grey areas' should be cause for 'IC punishment' unless /specifically/ stated in the God's helpfile as a 'house rule.'

Please remember that FMs and Imms are characters too. I don't believe that it is correct to allow a player to make their own IC decision while simultaneously declaring that other players (e.g. FMs) should not be allowed to make their own IC decisions. Why restrict the rp of one group of PCs and not another? Basically, taken together, those two statements say that characters are free to make their own decisions, unless you are one of the characters who makes decisions enacting IC punishment. It is one thing to say that everyone should be allowed to rp their characters as they see fit and live with the IC consequences that come from other players rping their characters as they see fit. It is another to say that everyone should be allowed to rp their characters as they see fit but that FM characters and imm characters should not be afforded the same privilege.

I agree with the comments that there will be differences within faith. There should be, it makes things lively. However, I don't agree with the "you follow X god the way you want and I'll follow the deity the way I want because I disagree with what you say is dogma." Sure, that's fine if we are talking about two initiates, but if the statement is made by an initiate to a FM, the FM has more power. His/her job is, afterall, to MANAGE the faith. In FK, all players are equal, all CHARACTERS are not.

Just because you may not be privy to the details of the RP does not mean they are acting OOC or buddy-buddy because of their OOC relationship.

You are correct, such situations do not have to mean that there are OOC shinnanegans going on. However, the reverse is also true and people are fooling themselves if they believe it does not happen or that it only happens in the rarest of times. My question though is with the "just because you may not be privy to the details" part. Why isn't the imm of the faithful character aware? Why isn't the FM aware? Why not be proactive? If you plan on being involved in an rp that could be perceived as questionable with your faith, inform the faith manager or send an e-mail to applications letting the imms know what is going on. Then, if it is observed, you are covered. A caveat here though, we imms hear many IC justifications for ooc things. It is possible to explain away anything with "but that's what my character would do." If involving yourself in any kind of thing like this, we would expect a much higher degree of explanation.

Finally, much of this discussion has been on faith matters. Granted, race and faith in FK/FR are very intermixed, but race is huge. Some races have more latitude. Humans can usually be involved in most any rp from a race persepctive: human-dwarven, human-elven, human-drow, human-orc etc. But many races despise each other and would not associate unless there were very very mitigating factors involved. Elves and Orcs hanging out together? No WAY, unless one of them was actually hanging! It doesn't even matter if the elf is evil, it's a race thing. Drow and Orcs? Likely not either, but I can see more of a case for it IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES are right. And so on.

So, let's keep the vitriol down and just deal with the issues.

**Any caps used in this post are purely for emphasis, not yelling at anyone.