Forums

Another Topic: Standardization

Quick find code: 237-238-284-65784904

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Going to quote my reply from Lozz's thread onto here.

Original message details are unavailable.
I... actually had an idea somewhat similar to this a couple months ago. 42 has a long and illustrious history of disagreements that turn nasty fast - particularly in the arena of RP combat. After a particularly rapid succession of that, I'd struck upon the idea of creating a thread that served as a weekly forum for mature discussion regarding non-specific issues of contention.

For instance, when weapons of different metals clash. Would the stronger one sunder the weaker? Alternatively, would they have the typical reaction of real world equipment? That's the sort of thing that would be discussed over the course of the week to determine what should be considered the best solution to that disagreement.

I'm not sure how well such a thread would work out, and it could have its fair share of flaws - tyranny by the majority could be a commonly cited one. Some things would likely also be impossible, and shouldn't be, fully standardized, like magic.

I, personally, wouldn't mind standardization, but I am one amongst many. :P
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

27-Apr-2016 19:48:42

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Right, school's done for the day, so back to the forums, I go!

Lord Pyro I said:
@Spartae

I'd hope to see part of the agreement ensure that people are always able to open up dialogue if there is an issue.

As for you first paragraph, I'd like to hear from other people, is this idea something you would champion?


It'd be highly unusual if an option for dialogue wasn't available, from my point of view. I'd imagine that the guidelines regarding various issues would be written to be as clear cut as possible, and fair for as many as possible, so that dialogue would hardly be needed. In the cases that dialogue would be needed... I would guess that would take place on the forums, as an in-game dialogue could potentially flare into a disagreement.

Regarding the issue of championing: My quoted post has stated that I had intended to make a thread specifically for the resolution of various contentious issues within the community, so as to minimize undesirable argument. That still stands, and I would happily champion the idea of standardization.
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

27-Apr-2016 22:45:25

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lorelei said:
I don't think standardization would work: there's no way to reach the entire community, and no way to make the entire community agree.


The forums would already reach a sizable portion of those affected by it. Word of mouth would fill in for most of the remainder, and those who don't know can be directed to the thread, if an issue arises.

As to the latter, fair point. I don't view standardization as a dictatorial measure - I view it as a means of clearing aside confusion on certain topics. There will undoubtedly be a few dissenters - but I'd rather have a few people in dissent, than the majority flaming each other over simple actions in RP fights, or sending malicious PM's in-game, and on third-party programs, due to the lack of a standard.

Lorelei said:
People in different friend groups can agree on different head-canons, and that's the best way to go about it.


Until those headcanons come into conflict when those groups interact. :|

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 17:42:33

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lorelei said:
Trying to standardize is a waste of time. Kind of like how it went with people using the Tibby system. Yes, we should use it! No, we shouldn't! Arguments on both sides. Nothing changed. No point. People that wanted to use it did, typically people in the same friend group all adhered to it. And then it was proven totally against canon, and I had a good laugh about it.


Apathy solves nothing, and only generates more issues, as time wears on. Things as they stand in the here and now are less chaotic on the surface than they may have been a few years ago, but I wouldn't say much has really changed from the past, when you get down to it. The same disputes still occur, they've merely adopted a different face. Maybe it's time to solve them?

Lorelei said:
It's best to keep some things as vague as possible, like the passage of time, or the worth of things. It avoids arguments.

"Yes, I have enough money to afford x, but don't necessarily have enough for y". End of story.


I agree with you on this, particularly on the example of time. That's something that would be utter madness to attempt. I'm not saying that everything must be a certain way - just the things that are clearly causing significant tension within the community.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 17:50:58

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Greyson Val said:
I would love a little standardization myself.

Armor being one.

Magic being one.

Oft it feels like everyone is on a slightly different page; same book however.
I could also say putting in the effort to do all this would drastically change how we choose to see new equipment (GWD St00f, etc, etc.)

A good guide to the everything of RuneScape Role-Playing, a mix of getting oldies to use it, and just starting the newbies on it right of. I hate arguing about combat, or some other bs that should kinda be solved and defined by now, imo.


Agreed 100%. Different page, same book is exactly the analogy I would use for when these disagreements arise. I too dislike these sorts of arguments - it's something that should have been solved quite some time ago.

Zrie said:
To be honest, I agree with Faey's parenthetical aside about a blank slate. I'm only seeing something like this working well if there's some sort of complete reset on our canon, land holdings, and everything else. Trying to mesh a large standardization with our current way of doings things will only create complications and further divide our community that values tradition and hates change. A reset along with these changes removes the need of deciding who's doing what right and wrong.


I disagree. A complete reset on 42 canon seems to me a bit too disproportionate to solving issues like these. A reset in addition to standardization, to me, sounds like it would cause more arguments than the issue of standardization on its own. It could work, but I don't think people would want all their characters' achievements to just be voided out.

Good grief, another continued post.
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 18:00:36

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Zrie said:
I know the argument against resetting back and forth: making a new canon will just split the population, a group ignoring the other. How is that any different than ignoring those who don't follow the same rules?


I... don't think we've advocated ignoring people as a result of not conforming to what would be standardized? If you mean the current state of things, I agree. I don't like the idea of all these isolated bubbles scattered throughout the community, either. Whether standardization would cause a positive change in that, or if a different solution would be needed remains to be seen. I'd like to solve that issue, as well. :|


Zrie said:
Finally, I have to disagree with Spartae. A transition will be needed, yes, but delaying the process over an extended time will only kill the initiative, and people will likely fall back to their old ways of doing things. I'm not sure on how to implement this because I've always avoided leadership roles, so I'm just throwing out an idea.


The thing is, it would have to take a while for standardization to be implemented, as it would take time to properly decide on the standard. Rushing through it has the potential to cause more problems than it solves. I'm not saying it's going to take years, like Spartae has suggested - but it's not going to be all fine and dandy in a week either.
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 18:09:23

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Zrie said:
I'm not saying it's proportionate and an end to all issues, just a means to an end. Too much of our canon is contradictory with RS lore. I'm not going to go into specific incidences since everyone knows one or two, what I mean to discuss is that our canon is too inconsistent. What I see as most important to standardize is the progression of time, I've always thought it should be kept vague. Nothing's as immersion breaking as playing a character who has aged a year coming across a character that has aged a decade. It makes no sense.

If we try to standardize time we'll have to throw out what doesn't make sense, but why stop there? Many of our role-plays are a result of head-canon based on outdated lore, I've always seen it as a hurdle for new role-players. I know perfectly well that people love their characters, but sometimes you have to let go.


I won't deny that a healthy chunk of our canon goes against the lore of the game - the fact we have POK's with RP'er leaders is probably the most noticeable one. There's also a lot of stuff in our canon that is never even mentioned in the game, but that's more of a lorebend than a lorebreak. There's also some issues of contentious canon (Mahjarrat, for instance) that would probably need to be addressed at some point, but that seems like a separate discussion to me.

On the topic of time, I agree that immersion is really limited by the irregular character timeskips. Some of my characters have met other people's great-grandchildren, which is rather off-putting. At the same time, I feel that standardizing time could have the effect of limiting people's creativity, which I'm not too terribly keen on doing. Plus, there's the headache of what year we're even in to consider.

Since I'll address what I think ought to be standardized in another post, I'm curious what else you'd like to do, beyond standardizing time.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 19:30:09

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Zrie said:
No. I know that's not being advocated, but it's often the result. I support change, but it has consequences that we'll have to deal with. Which is worse: Sticking with the same, broken system, or arguing over how to make a better one?


Ah, my bad! I misunderstood you. True, that is all too often an unfortunate consequence, and the blacklist days are still fresh in my memory. We'll have to brainstorm a system on how to prevent that sort of thing.

As to your question, like I've said earlier: staying indifferent to issues that necessitate change will only propagate further issues. History has oft proven that point with the issue of government. So far, I think this is a great thread for us to air out our thoughts in an intellectual fashion, and I've seen minimal hostility, so I feel that the first option would be worse.

Zrie said:
I think standardization is a step in the right direction, but what should we standardize and what should we leave to the discretion of the role-player?


What I feel should be standardized:

• Melee combat: rules and guidelines on armour, weapons, metals, techniques, etc.
• Ranged combat: power and range of weaponry, much the same as above.
• Invasions, and the policy surrounding them.
• Tactics in battles: siege equipment, flanking maneuvers, etc.
• Siege warfare.
• Assassinations and espionage: how they play out, who should be informed OOC'ly, etc.
• Navies.
• Technology.

These are off the top of my head - there's likely more I've missed. The vast majority are related to RP combat and wars, because they are by far the most contentious issues in 42.

Edit: Added more bullet points.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 19:46:36 - Last edited on 28-Apr-2016 19:48:16 by Siberys

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Zrie said:
No, I wouldn't advocate that either. I think we should proceed carefully over a few months and hopefully have a functional system before summer's end. There will certainly be a lot of questions to answer.


Certainly! I estimate the most contentious issues will likely take a few months to deal with. I'm also optimistically hoping a system is in place by summer's end. There will most definitely be a lot of questions on standardization as a whole, the individual topics pertaining to it, and any future endeavors.

Spartae said:
I see this often enough, yes. Simply speaking, look at everyone who seems to support the things you do on a thread like this, reach out to them, and together work on a platform to build off of. Folks like Sib and Pyro who earnestly seem interested in the same directions of change - gather a group and talk more about it, structure it, make an anticipatory platform to introduce to the larger community.


I'd be down for that, yeah. I'd like to wait a little longer to see if the majority of the community are receptive to the idea at this particular stage, before I move forward with it, though.

Spartae said:
Likewise, I think standardizing both rules and potential punishments/reprimands for breaking rules would help the community police itself without all of the outright ignoring/banning that goes on - it would at least stand to lessen the occurrence of such.


I think a punishment system would have to be a separate package, and might prove distasteful to some, if it's introduced with standardization. I'd say only introduce a punishment system if it truly becomes necessary. If people abide by the standards, and if they don't, don't kick too much of a fuss about it, then I would say it would only be needed in extreme circumstances.
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

28-Apr-2016 19:59:07

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Right, back to the debating forum. (Zrie, friend, I'll reply to your posts after this!)

Going to address some of the specifics in your posts, Lor, before the main part of the message.

Lorelei said:
I see a lot of what people propose as standardization in the same light as I regard the Mahjarrat division theory: it's largely stupid, has no foundation in the lore, a lot of gaps, a lot of things that would go AGAINST the lore quite blatantly and would be too complicated to set up properly.


... Uh? Resolving disputes before they occur seems rather lacking of stupidity, much of the propositions for standardization have nothing to do with contradicting the lore, there don't seem to be that many gaps, and I've already outlined a simplistic system for setting it up. The only thing I would see as remotely contradicting the lore would be standardizing what already exists as a 'lorebreak' (POK invasions, for instance).

Lorelei said:
I just don't get it. Maybe I'm just getting older, but it doesn't click to me. I don't understand. Why is there a need for standardization? It's because people can't take five minutes out of their days to actually communicate with each-other and agree on something, because most people still aren't adult enough to do it.


An unfortunate truth. Standardization wouldn't be necessary, if not for all the issues that arise in the community. Alas, this is far from Utopia.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 16:49:44

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lorelei said:
I'll always run with JaGeX canon and fill in gaps. If you just did that, you wouldn't need standardization at all. Just logic and ideas. But it's contrary to what people do these days. Because timeskips. Because whatever.


As I've outlined, most of what I've proposed is for logic. The reason it's being proposed is people seem to have disagreements on that. :|

Lorelei said:
I'm going on 24 in a couple of months and I sign onto the RS forums because RS is a game I enjoy, with lore I find rad, and I find out that people are suggesting an internet police about online pretend time. The idea is so laughable that I'm going back to bed after this farming run. The worst part about it is how people don't realize how ridiculous it is.

People that break rules already punish themselves by way of isolation. No one wants to play with them, because they're being that one guy in the playground that decides that you should say * next while you're playing pretend. No one liked that person as a kid. No one likes them now.

So why have a 'community police', which is an awful lot like telling people to say y next? 'Cause power. Which looks an awful lot like how it is with POCs and that one kid we all hated, and still do.


As 'people' is plural, I'm assuming that's partly directed at me. Like I've said, I don't want there to be a punishment system, unless it is 100% necessary - which I really hope it isn't. As has also already been stated, nobody is advocating isolation either - on the contrary, I'd like for the community to be more close-knit. If you meant the idea of standardization in general, nobody is doing this for power. It's intended as a community initiative, and the community would decide on the issues.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 17:05:30

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lorelei said:
Because of that foundation, it's now difficult to get into W42's roleplay. If you're new, you know all the RS lore and you're like "RAD" and you jump in to a new gaming experience, you realize that you know nothing, all of a sudden. All that history you've come to learn, irrelevant, no longer applicable.

If you leave for a couple months, so much as has happened and there have been so many timeskips that you're now lost. Your best friend is 75 and you're still 23 but some other people are long dead and you're now interacting with their great-great-grandkids. Uh, what?


Except... plenty of people over the years have been new to the community, and have ingratiated themselves into it just fine. In fact, the vast majority of people in the community joined during the era of "42 canon." Nor would I say that your knowledge of RS lore is absolute moot. On the first page, there has literally been discussion about the newest quest, and how the lore affects the status quo. Obviously, it still has a measure of importance, otherwise it would be utterly blindsided.

As to the timeskips, yet again, I agree. If there is a way to make that work for everyone, I'd love to explore it. Placing restrictions on timeskips, though, will almost certainly step on a few people's toes - namely those who want to get their characters' children played ASAP.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 17:19:48

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lorelei said:
Anything else is inadequate. The entire point between standardizing a system is to ensure quality, ease of operability (making things user-friendly) and ensuring compatibility.


While I agree with the three points in standardization, deeming everything else as inadequate... I have to disagree. Even with the abolishment of POK's, which I will get to, it wouldn't work by itself. You still have all the problems with RP combat that you have to deal with. A lack of a POK system is not going to stop someone calling somebody else out for a move they can't do.

Lorelei said:
There's no way to do that but to make the standard the foundation that JaGeX has given us, which isn't really the case right now. We all know the lore and the timeline, and it's easy to search if we don't: the resource is easily available, we all know the RS wiki, but not all of us know or use the RSRP wiki. Resources for W42 canon are far, far more convoluted, which makes them too difficult to standardize.


Again, I'm not sure how what has been proposed is too difficult to even be feasible, as it really doesn't delve that much into the canon. Have guidelines for RP combat, introduce the do's and do not's for when you want to initiate a war (or if you're the defendant), et cetera. We're not delving years into 42's past here, requiring everyone to know what so-and-so did when he was ruler of a kingdom. We're just discussing how to make things less toxic. :|

Yet another continued post. I'll get to your main point eventually. ;-;
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 17:30:04

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Lorelei said:
But yes, I know it's not going to happen, but that wasn't the point. The point was to make people realize that they don't actually want true standardization. If they did, then they wouldn't be advocating this one. A lot of people feel like they lose out on taking the road that I'm proposing, thus betraying themselves and proving that they are not people that I would like to play with. They weed themselves out by posting. Rubes.


Hi. I'm not sure how my advocating the proposed system automatically excludes me from wanting POK's out... but, alright.

Which I guess (finally) brings me to the main point: getting rid of POK's.

Despite potential indications to the contrary... this is an idea I would get behind. I honestly don't care that much about having a pretend crown. I got my start in the private RP days, and even though I was terrible back then, I think it's still my favorite era in RSRP. I'm a huge advocate of story, and I really liked your examples on the Temple Knights and Wizard's Tower. Eliminating POK's would make a significant amount of toxicity evaporate with a snap of one's fingers. It sounds like a great solution.

It's noble. Maybe a little idealistic.

And that's exactly why it wouldn't work - for reasons you've already outlined.

I second your opinion on the 'power game' mentality. Power is a natural human desire. People want to be in control, they want things to go their way. That's just human nature.

As such, it's likely that most would turn down the notion of POK erasure. We might not admit it, but the allure of control is just a bit too tempting.

(cont.)
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 17:46:21

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
(This post and one above continued from previous page.)

So, yes, I'd like a return to plot-focused RP, but it's just not likely to happen. So, instead, I'm making do with what we can change. We might not be able to kick out the notion of a POK - but we can at least try to make it agreeable, rather than an object over which tempers flare*

**;DR? Let's agree to disagree? :P

P.S: Genuinely sorry to hear that past community interactions have proven unpleasant and strenuous. Generally, I've found that taking breaks has personally helped me - need a little hiatus from the shenanigans every once and a while. Maybe eventually it won't be necessary anymore? I guess we can dream.

Fin.
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 17:56:47

Siberys

Siberys

Posts: 4,893Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Forgot to address something. Woops.

Lorelei said:
The sense of fantasy never disappeared. The main setting is fantasy. There's a literal war between gods being waged, but you don't see kingdoms taking sides. You don't see recruitment drives or meetings about it. Because that plotline doesn't interest most people on W42, so they don't acknowledge it, even though it's a part of canon. Our canon deviated from main canon years ago, and it's probably never getting back on track, because people don't want it to be.


Actually... there's this.

The Kharidian Caliphate partook in the event during the Desert Storm arc, when the Heart came out. There were also some planned events in Misthalin, but due to the recent issues surrounding that, I believe it's being NPC'ed. I do think more POK's should take a role in the event, though (such as Asgarnia sending troops to aid the Saradominist faction).
"Legacy. What is a legacy? It's planting seeds in a garden you never get to see."

Siberys | W42 RP'er |
Praise Madoka.

29-Apr-2016 18:59:52

Quick find code: 237-238-284-65784904Back to Top