+- NEUS Projects (https://neus-projects.net/forums)
+-- Forum: Sigrogana Legend 2 (OOC) (https://neus-projects.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://neus-projects.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? (/showthread.php?tid=10837)
Pages:
1
2
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - WaifuApple - 02-20-2024
RP is a collaborative effort. Before acting on something, you need to collaborate with the person on the other end on what is happening in a particular scene. People always take these topics to the extreme of "so people are allowed to avoid all consequences to their actions", and that's simply not true. Within reason people can avoid bad things happening, but abusing that to get out of a sticky situation will end up with snowballing consequences down the line, and the possibility of a forced danger level. There are things in place for if someone's denial of injuries they would likely deserve becomes problematic.
Now, this recent case is nothing to do with "You hit me and I say I take no injury", and it worries me that a recent ban has led to a skewed perspective for the uninvolved, because that makes me feel like someone in that situation could be skewing the story to make it seem like they did nothing wrong. Which would be alarming, but that's besides the point.
If someone RPs something like a simple slap towards you, that's the kind of thing that happens and then you just move on. No likely injuries. If you then escalate it and make injuries for yourself, you turn that RP into a whole other topic. A much more sensitive topic, at that. This is not right to do without communication, because you're escalating the severity of something not meant to be that severe, and you're changing the fundamental theme of the story in that situation to something that could be uncomfortable for some. This is something you only do with the consent of the involved. In this instance, not everyone is comfortable having domestic conflict RP in their lives, and being deprived of a say in the matter because someone took your actions to be worse than you intended them to be does cross a line.
An age old comparison has always been void poisoning. You hit someone with a cheeky black bolt and now they're roleplaying having void poisoning and advancing to phase 2. They've made you responsible for the inevitable demise of their character, created severe consequences and criminal charges for you in a nation (probably), and didn't ask if you wanted that. While theoretically possible, just like a bruise to a slap and the spiralling nature that sounds to have come of that, in acting this way they take an anti-collaborative approach to RP and essentially ruin someone's experience.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - matthewmwps - 02-20-2024
(02-20-2024, 05:06 PM)lordpidey Wrote: I see.
So what I'm getting from this is people can attack me, and then tell me "Nah, I'm not letting there be any consequences to my character"
No?
If a scene occurs and you desire consequences to happen to the other character, but their player refuses, that is ALSO godmodding as its ignoring your wants/agency. Once again, communication is important! And if they refuse to listen the scene is best either omitted or reported to a GM.
If what you wrote here is reallly the only conclusion you can draw from everyones posts, then it seems you just came here to validate someone elses victimhood rather than engage in proper conversation. A shame, but not unexpected given the nature of your original post.
I hope you can at least read back on all this and gain some understanding of the issue.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - Poruku - 02-20-2024
I wanna add my last 2 thoughts. First is that it's on both participants to communicate stuff, and I don't think everyone is necessarily obligated to double check in looc about every reaction they make. It's good when you're unsure, and it's good practice to do it, but then if you think you're making an appropriate reaction, you can't always know what the other person was thinking. It's easy to look at things in retrospect and say "communicate, people", but in the moment you might have thought it was an obvious reaction. An observer might see it as something else. The other roleplayer might see it as exaggeration. Third parties who hear about the event might see it another way. What's the point of putting blame? This is their problem. This is something they should work out, and only if they fail to come to an understanding, should it be brought to others, like GMs. Except when you bring something to a GM you usually get someone banned and make the situation even more hostile.
If someone isn't comfortable with a reaction then it's kind of on them to say that when it happens, too. If there's failure in communication on both sides then it's something to resolve between those players, and you can just make a retcon. Why put the burden of communication on the person being injured this time? Usually it's put on me, the injurer. It should be both.
Secondly, regardless, in my eyes this is in the realm of a faux-pas, not a breach of the rules worthy of a ban. There's a million things that could happen that result in unintended consequences. Hell, I'm someone who has made plenty of faux-pas, creating situations that people didn't like, causing characters harm that they didn't sign up for. I failed to communicate many times, resulting in people feeling pressured into accepting combat or injury they didn't want. That's just one of the risks we run into when doing rp, an opportunity to learn from it, to learn what others prefer, figure out how to more forward, and do better next time. This is something we work on, not get banned about.
This thread is a lot of people saying "we should do this", "here is how to rp properly", but I'm just not convinced this can be counted as godmodding. Hell, isn't it godmodding to slap someone and want them to react in a specific way?
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - WaifuApple - 02-20-2024
It is not godmodding to slap someone and expect them not to make it much bigger of a deal than it is. Do not risk going into territory in which you blame the person who'd be considered the victim in seeking to make the banned person look more reasonable.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - Poruku - 02-20-2024
It's not godmodding either way, is my point. And I'm not victim blaming, I'm saying it's on both parties.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - WaifuApple - 02-20-2024
It is, in fact, godmodding injury to walk away from an incident and then say all these things happened that were not agreed upon. Especially when this is stated as a repeated set of behaviours that the player has been warned for prior. Three days is nothing for a trail of repeated behaviours, and if behaviour is repeated I find it hard to believe that it's an equal blame situation.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - Poruku - 02-20-2024
I agree it's bad behavior, but let's agree to disagree on the whole godmodding thing. Regardless, to me it's another case of a "minor" ban just making a situation into a big issue rather than solving anything.
I understand, though, and I know I'm probably missing context. And I'm certainly willing to respect the decision of the GMs. I just wanted to share my opinion on this sort of thing, considering the subject of the thread. My responses aren't entirely about this specific ban, either, but my general view of the matter. The original post is clearly done in outrage about the ban specifically, but I wanted to respond to it at face value as well, since it's something I've seen many times before, with different people.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - Balor - 02-20-2024
![[Image: zVagVEx.png]](https://i.imgur.com/zVagVEx.png)
If we are going to cut out the pretense and rhetoric then this entire thread is meant to challenge a ban by hitting the easiest point of the ban to challenge being the point of consent to an injury.
Blatantly ignoring the major points that likely actually led to the ban, and actively had been warned prior. I am not going to sit and pretend that a conversation was ever meant to be had when this thread was put up. Folks wanted to protest the punishment of a friend, and while that is understandable and even commendable.
Critical thinking was lost somewhere down the line. Feel free to disagree with me, feel free to dislike me for my perspective. But feel free to tell me, when I am telling lies.
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - zericosmic - 02-20-2024
(02-20-2024, 05:06 PM)lordpidey Wrote: I see.
So what I'm getting from this is people can attack me, and then tell me "Nah, I'm not letting there be any consequences to my character"
To dumb it down.
If someone flicks your characters forehead, it would be a little silly for you to emote your bones breaking, your skin falling off and your character dying. (even if mortal kombat might have people believe that that is normal when someone flicks your forehead.)
RE: What is required before having a visible injury due to preceeding RP? - Mewni - 03-01-2024
And for the love of god.
Don't apply injuries that is more than what a common tussle would inflict (bruises, scratches, bumps) when the SPAR option is picked and not the SERIOUS one.
Far too many times people got ultra salty and rp'd a grotesque scene of mutilation just because big number did hit you. I don't care if it was a 2k burst when you were Last-Chanced, or a 30 damage when you had 28 hp left. The end results will be the same.
If anyone does that, and refuse to dial it back and insist that your grenades and bombs going off on their last chance nearly killed them and now they are swiss cheese from fragments going through their body and a arm is barely hanging in it's socket, just call a GM and force some good sense on them.
I know what the Thread is about, but just wanted to give this extreme case that is far too common, and people need to understand they can refuse to become a villain on a drama-llama that is one-sided just because someone is bitter their build underperformed.