The Grass is Always Greener: Nobles vs. Commoners

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see what you are saying jesse, just a couple thigns in response tho- largely to clarify.

-Dont shoot the messenger on that october thing-Im just sayin what ive been told and what I saw (again, yeah, perception). Theres a lot of people not talking because they are afraid of drama (part of why We is getting used but I would really rather people start talking openly themselves). Understand... I really dont care what anyone is doing at this point. Nobles, commoners, plot, players... everyone should just do what they wanna do and be happy, and do their thing, and nomatter what that is, that has no effect on me personally. Ive got my gameplay figured out and have what I need.- wich is largely to be left alone. Im good. Im set- took me long enough but im choosing to actively take care of my entertainment and thats working well. : )

-And yeah we know Deepjug isnt "the noble tavern"- like totally. Its just that right now its the only place "in town" the public can hang out in so if you dont wanna chill with the nobility every gather, you're kindof short on options. Bout it. Theres no bad feelings about an alt location that isnt friendly to the belted, its just the practical thing to do to create options. A couple people in this thread are latching onto the idea of this idea being exclusionary- That is wrong. I dont think anyone who has decided otherwise, can be convinced this is true right now unless they want to let go of their perceived insult and believe better in the motivations of other players around them as well as separate the IC insult- and oh yes, we anticipate the IC butthurt for sure and welcome it- Thats good roleplay! -from the OOC... which isn't whats going on. The proof however is in that they (players presently playing belts) can definitely make alts and be perfectly welcome as those characters.
 
Last edited:
folks who tell B all of their stuffs:
You have nothing to fear... send in your dRaMa filled commentaries if this is the case. We will not spank you for your honest opinions. (Unless you enjoy that sorta thing... JK!)
 
er.... calling their commentaries and honest thoughts drama filled off the bat (the point is, they dont want conflict)...might not be the best way to aproach that...
 
Yes, but what is meant by that is that they are afraid of someone picking a fight or being mad at THEM, or taking something wrong. Not that they are trying to bring drama to the table.
 
Will, I'm really interested in what you're saying about perception. Some of the things you touch on specifically are controlled by Plot (Barons = War Leaders, or knights in the barons' absence; Nobles making decisions about armed monster races). What do you perceive are things that the PCs who play nobles can do to improve perception / involvement / opportunity? How can we act in a way that is more inclusive, more informative, or in better creation of opportunities for other players, specifically of commoner characters, to get involved?

Thanks,
Trace
 
B.Barber said:
Yes, but what is meant by that is that they are afraid of someone picking a fight or being mad at THEM, or taking something wrong. Not that they are trying to bring drama to the table.
Click to expand...
I just want to make sure I am understanding... you are saying that if they submit commentaries to plot, that they think plot will pick a fight with them or be mad at them???
 
Hm, now understand this is tough to communicate in writing- no tone and all that. But to a degree people are intimidated by the idea of openly offering criticism. Different reasons for that. But its partly to do with sometimes people just dont want to press the issue and are hoping it goes away or that someone else will fix it-if they know someone else will do the talking, they may take that as an out. Its sortof like... do you remember that issue you had to talk to me about a while back where someone complained about me yelling at someone because they didnt know it was IC and thought the person I yelled at was upset? I asked you who said that, and you told me you couldnt tell me that- And rightfully so because it could have incurred additional drama. Sortof like that- and sortof like how we arent haveing a whole lot of people participate in this convo: its other players they dont want to risk trouble with. Does that make more sense? I really wish this were a face to face convo, id do better at communicating this.
 
Trace, thanks for asking! I am really unsure what they (or even plot to a certain extent) can do to make the perception better, especially without selling out the very concept of nobility and commoner. One thing I have seen work in other games (and actually, saw work REALLY well in this last RP only event) was to have the nobility recognize commoners. The Duchess gave out verbal recognitions to three people for various things, and it felt very inclusive, like suddenly we were all on the same team. All I'm coming up with is stuff like delegation. "Goodman Fellstar, if you could please handle the Frying-pan Ogre situation, we would be much obliged. We trust your judgment in this matter." Anyway, its a start.
 
B.Barber said:
But to a degree people are intimidated by the idea of openly offering criticism. Different reasons for that. But its partly to do with sometimes people just dont want to press the issue and are hoping it goes away or that someone else will fix it-if they know someone else will do the talking, they may take that as an out. Its sortof like... do you remember that issue you had to talk to me about a while back where someone complained about me yelling at someone because they didnt know it was IC and thought the person I yelled at was upset? I asked you who said that, and you told me you couldnt tell me that- And rightfully so because it could have incurred additional drama. Sortof like that- and sortof like how we arent haveing a whole lot of people participate in this convo: its other players they dont want to risk trouble with.
Click to expand...

Please consider one other alternative: that the majority of players don't see this as an issue. I have heard 4-5 players talk about this issue. Perhaps there are more, but I suspect that really its a small group. It can be easy for any viewpoint to believe that it is more widely held than it actually is as a result of groupthink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink. Now I'm not saying that this problem is "irrational" or "unimportant". It is a good goal to try to get everyone to have fun at game. My biggest issue is when then fun comes at the expense of a much larger silent majority. Alliance is a game where there are Nobles and there are Non-Nobles. This is core to the game as much as magic and swords. Different games don't have this system. My personal preference is for more moral ambiguity and more player conflict in my LARPs. Alliance doesn't encourage those concepts because it is going for a more collaborative "high fantasy" approach rather than "Game of Thrones". I have a lot of fun in Alliance as it is so I don't try to change that. I know many of the players hate PvP and prefer easy moral choices that are spelled out by the Code.

Some games allow evil to operate out in the open. Alliance isn't one of those games. The majority of players that I have heard these complaints from are either trying to play "morally grey" characters and/or have a SERIOUS problem with authority (any authority). In this system your character is going to have an up hill battle. I think the game is better for these types of characters existing, but they are not "easy mode" by any stretch. What I think would be the greatest boon to the game is more commoner teams, especially those that back "evil" behavior. It is really hard to work against the noble-superstructure without a group of characters that have each other's backs. It is even harder to do it if you are trying to do it in the open. I think creating a bar that outright bans members of the nobility is doomed to failure IG (not OOG). Not every player has a right to be included in every thing a character does. Some characters just don't like each other and thats a good thing. Conflict creates story as long as the characters participating in that conflict don't take things OOG.

I hope that if a no-noble bar is created that the players that make it are mature enough to realize there will be IG consequences for the action and keep things IG rather than blaming the "players of noble PCs".
 
Things will be fine. Please stop making negative predictions/suppositions and give it a chance to unfold before making judgements.
 
Graham Wolsey said:
In this system your character is going to have an up hill battle.
Click to expand...

Just so that we are on the same page: it's not the GAME system, though, its the imposed social system. Right? The system that has been created within the Denver group to include noble and commoner tiers. And although what feels like a strong push towards specific moral archetypes IS my issue, I don't think that's B's issue at all (please correct me if I'm wrong). Did someone even bring up the desire to play evil in this thread? Objection: immaterial.

Also, it may be that there are only a few complainers, but we don't know. Maybe we need a survey. :) Seems like dismissing it without knowing one way or the other is premature. Objection: Facts not in evidence.

It seems bizarre, or at the very least hypocritical, to condemn a bar that excludes certain people who are only excluded because of the exclusive nature of their group. (Objection: unintelligible). Think of it as separate but equal. If such a bar would fail, lets let it fail in-game. And maybe the way it fails will be enough to incite the revolution that Acarthia so desperately needs. :)
 
There was mention of it (er, not evil, but more shifty, grey if you will)- its one of the things the place could help facilitate but no its no the primary goal. Your input is pretty much square Will (me personally deff not looking for revelution, just a breaky break from bowing every 10 min or less or simply hearing the word 'your grace'), and I thankya for it : )
 
I know that because the rulebook talks about the social system in it, that many people also believe the social system is part of the game system. For me, that is a very foreign concept as many other larps I have done they have been separate. But, I don't think everyone is on the same page here.
 
I can totally see that. Your belief, then, is that some people think the Alliance rules require some people to be nobility?
 
We're all typing fast so let's get something in here that needs to be said.

The flag waving on a bar that bans nobles is all well and good but the place doesn't exist even on propsal!

No establishment can really exist if it outright bans the noble class. Could you see the Healer's Guild or Mage's Guild or Merchant's Guild working out well? Could the Tavern survive by banning them? No. It would be foolish. This thread started on a RUMOR on something I'm fiddling with and working out the logistics of creating great story with. I have NO intention of ruining roleplay for folks or excluding people because they have some shiny I don't have.

I know we all have strong opinions and such but we are literally debating something that won't be created in the way some of you are focused on. I don't even have approval on creating it yet. No matter what I do, I'll accept the IG repercussions and have loads of conversations to address any OOG concerns that come up. If you have a concern about the bar which may or may not happen, please feel free to reach out to me.

End of line.
 
Yes. I believe that to be true. I also think they went so far to put in the rulebook is to insure that there is a class system and that it is somewhat consistent from chapter to chapter.
 
Graham Wolsey said:
I hope that if a no-noble bar is created that the players that make it are mature enough to realize there will be IG consequences for the action and keep things IG rather than blaming the "players of noble PCs".
Click to expand...

Well, one could equally say on the other side that if noble PCs act in a way that alienates non-noble PCs, that the players should realize that there will IG consequences for that action and not blame or chide the players of the non-noble PCs.

Also, I think on both sides that we want to engage in positive metagaming / steering. Just as players of nobles don't want to be cut off from a roleplay experience (vs. say having the roleplay experience of being an outsider, of being resented, or of playing out the consequences of having made a bad impression on another character) -- if non-noble players take the initiative of making a space that is centered around them, noble PCs can by all means play out the tension, raid the bar, whatever, but shouldn't choose to play in a way that actually makes their story element unviable. Ideally, I think, we'd be coordinating things out of game -- there are experienced, committed, and mature players involved in both forms of narrative, after all, so it should be entirely possible to balance interactions in a way that makes the best story for everyone.
 
Finally got a chance to catch up on this thread. A lot to read through and digest, we'll definitely be talking more about these things going forward. I can say that we already have some things in the works that we hope will help, and that we definitely want feedback on how things look from a player perspective.

Being a data geek at heart who includes metrics in ALL THE THINGS at work, I think Parizvel's idea of a survey is excellent (I may be biased). I've been putting together a survey around the sorts of things people get out of the game and what they would like to see so that we'll be better informed in how we structure things on our end. I'll be sending that out in the coming months just to get an overall feel around what people are looking for, what they get out of the game, etc.

More suited to the forum and less to the survey, I do have a question with respect to this that sort of plays the other side of Trace's question: What elements do people perceive as making plot "noble" or "commoner" focused? Not so much what specific plotlines that that are running or have run unless you think that they make for a good exemplar, but what sorts of things make a plotline come across as a "commoner plotline" or a "noble plotline"?
 
David, I applaud your question about what makes something "noble" plot or "commoner" plot!

I had this very debate with one of my closest friends yesterday -- he and I, at least, have wildly varying views on the subject.

I think there are two differentiators: Exclusivity and Interest.

When I, personally, think of "noble" vs. "common" plot, I tend to think mainly in Exclusivity. I got to go on a really fun 10-minute module in the Cave of Chivalry because I play a knight. The white belt was required for participation in that. You couldn't participate (directly) if you weren't a noble. It's indisputably "noble plot." In my personal opinion, this is, by the way, the singular instance of "noble plot" I feel that I've ever personally encountered in this game.

An example on the other side of the fence is the module that Sheriff Fury hooked a few months ago where he specifically wanted to invite adventurers who were not part of a noble court. Could not participate if you were from a barony -- exclusively "commoner" plot.

Now, when we ask, "Who will be interested in this storyline?" the line gets a lot fuzzier. I am super honored to have Local Plot choose to run a storyline about my PC's character history. My PC's mother was murdered, and there's a big investigation into it. That NPC dead mother happened to be a knight, and there are political implications to the murder. Is it noble plot because it involves politics? Is it open only to nobles? Open only to characters in noble houses? Closed to commoners? Or simply of interest mainly to players who like politics? In my opinion, that's not "noble" plot -- It's general in nature. It's no more noble than the Key of Shadows is noble plot because players who have noble characters happen to be interested in it.

I think much of the envy about "noble plot" comes from the perception that noble teams appear busy and involved. Is it because they're a noble house, though? Or because the team is big, active, and picked up a hook (whether through direct delivery, or lucky chance)?

Great question, David! I think it really cuts near to the heart of the matter.

Trace
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top