Freud, NERO, and you.

[Anonymous]

Re: Jim's question

The point at which you're treating an IG situation differently because it was brought upon you by PC interactions as opposed to plot interactions would be metagaming, IMO.

 

[Sarah]

How so? There can actually be real in game reasons for treating a situation differently when brought about by a PC vs. an NPC. Station, race, abilities, shoot even eye color can affect those decisions for some characters.

Plot killing my character doesn't bother me generally because there's a reason why the character died. Even if it was "No one healing arts'd me to see if I was dead or not before performing first aid." Sucks, but thems the breaks.

PCs killing my character fot the phat lewt cause getting phat lewt is fun for them, is not going to be fun for me. Especially cause the only phat lewt I have is stuck to my character...

 

[Anonymous]

Basically what she said. Although it's possible that I read into it what she went on to clarify. It was my intention to not focus on the specific issue, and it is a view that I've heard expressed both while a pc and while on plot. One of the times it was meant as a compliment (ala "It's cool when you guys mess with me, but those guy are pissin' me off") but it's not that much better in the long run.
I definately agree that Players are more interested in what's fun for them, and I think that part of the problem in this particular area is that there isn't a really solid feel to the game right now. If people knew what to expect, then they'd atleast know wether they can expect it on a usual basis, or if they have to make it happen on their own. Not everyone who's making things happen on their own is going to make the game less fun for the rest of the players. However, the people who just follow along with what's going on and never try to assert themselves to do what they want arn't going to have a positive influence on their game environment. (At least to them.)

 

[Anonymous]

Actually, I think that in this particular game, phat lewt is a perfectly valid reason. The game is designed with a very specific economy in mind, and it, along with all the combat abilities, are very important to the game. If you're playing a character that doesn't use either of these things, you're not really playing the same game. As a LARP, NERO is an RPG, but it's a combat RPG, and whereas the bulk of any particular game probably isn't combat, it's definatly encouraged. Especially for the p-hat.

 

[meltedwing]

Keep in mind, not everyone plays for the same reasons as well. I know some people love the player vs player death life crap.
Myself I think that when it gets past a certion point, its not any fun, and a distraction from why I play. I prefer less player vs player, becouse in all honesty if I wanted that, I could pick fights with real people.
The point being, people may be getting annoyed becouse they wanted something else from the game, and others are making it no fun. I know if I picked a player's character, and killed them over and over (as an example) I might have fun, and they might not. I know people who would love to play a mostly non-combatent in game, or those who would like to only investigate mysterys. And there are those who like to do the player vs player power plays and showmenship. When the diffrent groups mix, there can be problems and reactions. If you have this big plan where you hunt down and rez someone who likes the player vs player, you might get a "well done" from them. Do that same thing to someone who plays for the politics, or "good guy" aspect, and you might piss them off, as your fun is counter to their fun. Its all in the eye of the beholder.

You should also keep in mind that Nero specifically allows pvp... in games like EQ2 where they don't want pvp... they ban it... you can't affect another player with harmful effects. If Nero Alliance as a whole wanted to vote that player initiated harmful affects do not affect other player characters... then that would be different, but they haven't.

Player killing is just as much an aspect of Nero as political mind games and peaceful fireside roleplaying.

People also need to keep in mind that your character needs to be responsible for their actions. While you say I'm ruining someones fun by killing their character, I would say it would ruin my fun if someone was being a complete jerk and I wasn't allowed to kill them. Can you imagine if someone came up to you and spent all weekend irritating the crap out of you and plot told you that you aren't allowed to kill them because it would ruin your fun?

There are repercussions for characters actions... people need to face those IG and not take them OOG where we're all just a bunch of players of a game. A little OOG bantering and chiding is all well and good too... it's all a part of a social dynamic in which we find ourselves.

~Mark

 

[meltedwing]

You know, I cant agree this is a bad thing. The reason is easy 1st, I trust plot to have reasons for messing with me, or killing me. A player may do it for "fun" or some flimsy IG reason, or a good reason. The problem is, with plot I have checks and balances and etc. with another player it could just be the player or character doesn't like something, so plays the bully. It may be metagamming, but much like safety some meta is around to make the game more fun. If we had freeform player vs player combat all the time, I and many others would find a new game.

On that note, though an npc is less important than a player, the players (note the s) are more important than any one player, and the NPCs or all of plot is also more important. If you, the player, wants to make/do something that no one else in game will have fun with, you may be out of luck. If you the player do not like something the NPCs do (but the rest of the game does) you may be out of luck.

There is a balance that needs to be held, and there are a number of players who (In the past and now) like to do things just to do things that are conterary to the way the game setting is made. Now if they are doing this for character reasons (dramatic hero, good backround, etc.) more power to them, but if they expect the whole game setting to change becouse of what "they" want, they may need to see what everyone else wants as well.
As I said before, its all what you are looking for in the game, and respect as well. IG it would be easy to roll all the new charicters IG, but ooc, it would drive the new players away, so most people don't do it. That is an example where players outweigh player.

Essentially what you are saying is that there is a pseudo script for PC's... that's not true. You also stated that some meta is good... metagaming is strictly against the rules of Nero and is punishable by banishment... now I'm not saying we should go gank all the newbies... but I remember when I started Nero, and if no one ever got upset at me then... I probably wouldn't have had near as much fun and wouldn't be around today. You're proposing that we must get permission to gank players... you don't need permission for that... if you needed it... this wouldn't be Nero. I know you haven't gone to that many chapters before, so I'm sure your experience is limited to Nero seattle where, a few years ago, plot decided to start harshing on people who enjoy the PVP aspect of Nero by bringing in uber powerful NPC's to smack them down... it's been a while but I think people finally got so fed up with this that they decided to just accept the consequences and gank pc's anyway. If plot decides to beat on the PVP players with uber powerful NPC's then the game might flare up and die, but that would be the choice of plot.

Nero Seattle is the only chapter I've ever seen where PVP is not encouraged, let alone discouraged. Most chapters really like it when players get the game moving by adding a little 'unsafe' feeling to things to keep the heartbeat of the chapter going.

~Mark

 

[meltedwing]

PCs killing my character fot the phat lewt cause getting phat lewt is fun for them, is not going to be fun for me. Especially cause the only phat lewt I have is stuck to my character...

This is a very presumptive statement. You are assuming there are no other reasons to kill a character... Hell... out of game I really dig the plot that you have going with your gryphon, and I dislike that I have plot that indicates I should kill it, and you, just for existing. That's what I have to deal with... and Yasmay gave me an excuse in game to do something I wanted to do out of game, which was arrange for a way to not have to kill it.

~Mark

 

[Sarah]

I'm not assuming there aren't other, legitimate reasons to gank someone. I'm saying that, for me, someone ganking me for non-existant phat lewt would not be fun.

 

[Kauss]

Essentially what you are saying is that there is a pseudo script for PC's... that's not true. You also stated that some meta is good... metagaming is strictly against the rules of Nero and is punishable by banishment... now I'm not saying we should go gank all the newbies... but I remember when I started Nero, and if no one ever got upset at me then... I probably wouldn't have had near as much fun and wouldn't be around today. You're proposing that we must get permission to gank players... you don't need permission for that... if you needed it... this wouldn't be Nero. I know you haven't gone to that many chapters before, so I'm sure your experience is limited to Nero seattle where, a few years ago, plot decided to start harshing on people who enjoy the PVP aspect of Nero by bringing in uber powerful NPC's to smack them down... it's been a while but I think people finally got so fed up with this that they decided to just accept the consequences and gank pc's anyway. If plot decides to beat on the PVP players with uber powerful NPC's then the game might flare up and die, but that would be the choice of plot.

Nero Seattle is the only chapter I've ever seen where PVP is not encouraged, let alone discouraged. Most chapters really like it when players get the game moving by adding a little 'unsafe' feeling to things to keep the heartbeat of the chapter going.

~Mark

Since you dont know me, I will illuminate things a bit. I actally have played in a number of Larps, some that predate Nero actally, and I understand that some PVP is cool and ok. And I am far from saying that players need to go to plot to kill other players (And I think most people got that.) What I am saying, is not eveyone plays nero to kill/be killed by the other players. And while you get some people who are good about the whole thing (Having IG reasons and such) you also get people who feel that playing a Bully is fun as well. Now this wouldnt be so much a problem, except that if a charicter goes to NPCs who would normaly "deal" with this kind of thing, often the "bully" charicter complanes that this is stiffaling his/her charicter. So then you get a situation where people feel they a) need to avoid those sorts of people. or B) they have to have nothing but combat abilitys to defend themselves.
As to the matter of "uber" npcs harshing PVP, thats just bull. In the cases you have seen such, I can tell you that its a PC going to the law, the guard, the watch,ect and asking them to help out/reporting to them a crime. And then "uber" NPC does his IG job and arrests people, beats them down, has court, whatever. Now I understand that a lot of other nero chapers have a more lawless feel to them, but this one was very clear on the fact there was law and people to enforce them (some PCs as well) (In fact, the laws were printed up and made avalable some time ago). To be honest, some of the laws have been underenforced, in part, becouse some of the charicters/players dont beleve that the NPCs will gunch players for violating the law.
I can clearly see that we play nero for diffrent aspects of the game, but thats the wonder of the game.

 

[Kauss]

As to metagamming in general. You all need to keep in mind the definition of Nero metagamming has some particuler examples that override it. Case in point, you know a player has a sore/injured spot/problem. That player's charicter goes down in combat roughly, you the player will want to make sure they are ok, knowing that there may be a problem, becouse of ooc info. Even if a hold isnt called, you may be a bit more carefull hitting them, becouse of what you know ooc.
Pages, as part of there nature, involve metagamming. IG they are targets, ooc you need to recall at all times they are pages, so IG you may use diffrent tatics, becouse they are pages.
The list goes on, but it is why we have the spirit of the rules as a guideline/adder to the more solid rules.
The point being, if you know ooc someone is not enjoying the game, becouse of a direct result of you IG actions, you may want to think about it. If you truely acting IG, and your intendng to have fun, mayhap a word to that player sometime just telling them its all IG is a good idea. If you look at yourself and realise your just being a jerk ooc, then mayhap you should rethink things.
Page 154 "Metagame: To use out-of-game knowledge to help your in-game character. This is cheating."
Note this is for things that help you IG. If you use the info to let plot screw you better, to restrict your actions, ect then this rule doesnt apply, and you need to check the other rules.

 

[Seattle_Jim]

???

Nero Seattle is the only chapter I've ever seen where PVP is not encouraged, let alone discouraged.
~Mark

Where are you getting that from? You all have my blessings to go and kill each other to PD. Please don't do it just to target a player you don't like though. I would also like to see some sort of in game motivation. Is phat-loot a valid reason? Yes, by all means, that is a very valid reason to kill someone.

I think the point on that was that the person being killed, whether they have phat loot or not, probably does not find it as fun to be killed because they have a magic dagger, but rather would enjoy being killed more for other reasons, such as the bad things they have done or what have you. But please, roll people, be my guest.

I am all for characters being evil, but be smart about it, I won't spoon feed it, just as I won't spoon feed the good guys. Look for the next long story arc to be the result of inaction on something that I pressumed the good guys would have looked into/stopped. Is this a punishment? No, of course not. I think it will make for a good story and will have elements that some people have be looking for while maintaining opportunities for people who have been enjoying current storylines and themes. The thing I am most pleased with the story arc is that the plane isn?t in danger.

 

[jpariury]

I'm certain the frustration and obligation stems from the unique position I play within the game.

Believe it or not, the game would go on without Deira. Anytime you start viewing participation as an obligation, then you make my point all the more: you've probably forgotten how to just play.

I actually got a decent look at what would happen last event if I were to not play Diera for a period of time at this current point. I didn't like it.

This is pretty vague. What happened at NERO while you NPC'ed that you didn't like? And, why did you dislike it?

My take on what started this conversation (which I can see going down its own deep, dark path) is that comments were made oog about an ig scenario, which could or could not be true, that could easily be interpreted as a taunt (not saying that was the intent) and I can see where that would not be fun. Taunting a character IG is one thing, OOG is another.

Agreed. And if my good-natured ribbing was read as anything other than just that, then I must ask "Why?". I bear no one at the game any form of ill-will, and, to my knowledge, no one bears me any, so if people are taking ribbing as hurtful in some way, my first conclusion is that people are reading way more into it, and I'm suggesting possible root cause. If anyone disagrees, then the two venues to take are to present an arguement (in the classic debate-format, rather than the emotional-conflict context) of greater validity or to refute the points made in the original arguement.

As an aside, much of Freud's work is no longer viewed as creditable.

Agreed, however, this does not refute any of the points made through application of Freud's theory of the Id, Ego, and Superego. Unless you can bring some arguement against the specifics, this is just "muddying the waters". L. Ron Hubbard was on crack about many things, IMO, but that doesn't prevent me from applying the portions of his theories that are more likely valid.

 

[jpariury]

Good, then you can be the guild mistress and see what happens to *your* butt when the higher ups find out about it.

*She* would get plot attention and interaction. *Aeris* would be in big trouble. Discern the difference.

 

[Seattle_Jim]

Agreed, however, this does not refute any of the points made through application of Freud's theory of the Id, Ego, and Superego. Unless you can bring some arguement against the specifics, this is just "muddying the waters".

Yikes, I missed where this became a debate!

The Freud bit was an aside, which is to say I was making a comment off topic. It was not meant to invalidate anything and in fact the main part of what is still accepted is related to the Id, Ego, & Superego theory.

 

[jpariury]

Yikes, I missed where this became a debate!

The Freud bit was an aside, which is to say I was making a comment off topic. It was not meant to invalidate anything and in fact the main part of what is still accepted is related to the Id, Ego, & Superego theory.

Sorry about that, mea culpa. During a large portion of my break from playing NERO, I'd been modding, s-modding, and admining a for a large forum, with a primary focus on the religion/philosophy and current events/politics sections. My brain is pretty much hardwired to viewing anything where someone says one thing and someone says something to contradict or analyse a point of discussion as "debate". Doesn't have to follow the classic rules of debate, with timed responses and such, but these days I pretty much address text-based discussions of point-counterpoint with an eye toward identifying and eliminating fallacies and trying to keep on topic. My bad. :hammer:

 

[Aeris]

wait why woulld *Aeris* be in big trouble?

 

[Anonymous]

Getting back to subject of Freud and (by extension) psychology, I'm noticing something else here.

The primary posters here are possessed of, shall we say, strong personalities. This isn't a bad thing, just an observation.

My observations, based on posts in this thread, are probably not unique, but ce la vie.

I'm seeing a distinct tendency of posting as if from the mentality of their character IE, Phil is "speaking" very carefully, very concisely, yet staying on the good, orderly side of things.

Matt is leaning towards a semi-confrontational, chaotic "You're wrong, I'm right" perspective, much like I've observed Kerjal to be.

Mark is posting from what appears to be a neutral/neutral-evil perspective, again, much as I see Derek behaving.

Sarah is taking the same tack, neutral/neutral-good, with a bit of a martyr syndrome.

And of course, JP is just posting ad nauseum , but also concisely, and clearly. Gregor, pontificating at his best, I'd say.

Now, none of this is meant to poke fun at those mentioned, just to help illustrate my point. My point, now that I get around to it, is that I am seeing little difference between character and player, with respect to the above mentioned primary posters to this thread.

Is this a good thing, or bad? Who knows, for sure? Who even cares for sure? I don't. What I know is what I've seen, which is that many larpers have a hard time seperating character completely from player. It's damn near impossible, and Sarah, you know me well enough to know that Perrin and I are really really close, in both behavior and atitudes.

We assume the roles and lives of our characters, and we try to keep real life and game life seperate, but we will never truly be able to do that, simply because of who we as individuals are, and were, before we ever began to LARP. As a result, there is always something of ourselves inherent in each and every character we play, have played, or will ever play.

Think about that, the next time you decided to post, perform an action, or anything else at an event. Is it because it's something the *character* would actually, honestly do, or is it something the character would do based on both the situation and input from the player, input based on perhaps a dislike, a 'special favor', or any other circumstance?

I can't say for sure. I don't have enough time invested in just pure observation. But I can say for sure that in my experience, this is what I've seen.

Just some food for thought. Take it as you will, but don't take it offensively, it was never meant as such...

Spoone

 

[Sarah]

*She* would get plot attention and interaction. *Aeris* would be in big trouble. Discern the difference.

You know, I thought the original psycho-analysis post was rude and insulting. But this? This takes the damn cake. :aura:

 

[Seattle_Jim]

I have closed this thread.