I have no particular horse in this race since I RP with a guild that just largely does its own thing but I don’t think we should be dishonest about what this entails and the inevitable outcome of it. When you split a community between war and peace, with neither side being willing to find compromise and demanding that they have things their way and only their way you create a divided community which inherently creates “bubble RP” and “private RP”.
We should, at least, be frank and honest in acknowledging this eventuality and this outcome, since it appears to be what people in this thread desire as their preferred overall outcome to this dilemma. People aren’t going to spend 45 minutes when they find people in the wild RPing debating in whispers whether they can interact with them or not because they’re pro or anti war, they will quite simply RP a majority of the time, but this has inevitabilities that come with it; because eventually the question will be raised and the question will generate friction.
TBH we have posts already detailing how some interactions (regarding either the armistice, faction conflict or neutrals) were mutually respectful, chill and ultimately fun without going for the extremes of ignoring one another.
Nor do I treat my wall of text as the ultimate solution for this issue. What I do see it as is a frankly sane alternative to having an hour long argument over whether it’s lorewise safe to have RP-PvP (and it is, hence what I wrote in the OP).
If someone else goes ahead and treats the armistice as important (that is their right both IC and OOC) and to then tiptoe around the topic and look for ways to violate it without risking getting arrested and/or executed, that’s bound to be entertaining.
If others, like myself, don’t see the armistice as an omnipresent threat to what our guilds conduct on a weekly basis, then I said my piece already and trust the other party respects my stance.
A good rule of thumb is to treat everything that you see happening IC as happening IC without questioning it too much unless it’s passed the point of blatant memery. A lot of people nowadays seem willing and eager to just ignore whatever RP doesn’t coincide with their personalised criteria instead of trying to make sense of the situation through the lens of their character.
You see some people duking it out? Oh dear, look at that, a skirmish. I wonder what this is about. Maybe I should find cover. Wait, some of the people involved in the skirmish are the same race as I! Maybe I should help them. Maybe it’s too dangerous, maybe I should flee. Oh look there are some injured folk and I’m a healer, maybe I should try to help them?
I’ve always found it a good practice to try to contextualise anything I come across into my character’s perspective.
Or you could just start aggressively whispering and questioning these people who are clearly having a great time about the legitimacy of their RP scenario. BETTER YET, DO IT IC:
Heyho there brotherman say whats all this about anyways didnt u know theres an armistice and youre not meant to be slaughtering orcs
It was a wild ride. I will not go down examples because this isn’t the place, but people really went overboard. Spotting people going “It worked for them, but not for me now” isn’t exactly nice to read.
That being said, I see nothing wrong in having people have their “spaces”. Is it bubble RP? Well, I suspect it depends on how ever-present the faction conflict is in their RP. But…
I think we have all established not everyone wants this type of role-play.
While some groups, like Shogganosh’s, may appreciate this type of, let’s call them consequences (that is, people questioning WTF is going on, and developing and growing stuff from there) it is also clear that there is a group that does not want to deal with that, and is just there for the PVP ride. So, maybe, they just don’t want to deal with reasons that allow them to do faction conflict in the eyes of others every damn time.
And on top of it, there is definitely the risk of some pro-neutrality people turning overzealous and going (“the authorities will hear of this!” “I am very important so I demand all your carefully-organized campaign to cease immediately!”) which feels like an ego-trip rather than constructive role-play.
It is better to know you’re all on the same page rather than project some bits of the lore on people at random, who may have an uncomfortable experience out of it.
Justice for Dounen, what a lad, he was forced to sit outside until the Bouldergang came back.
The example Shogganosh provided wasn’t what I meant but yeah, it has happened. In fact it happened in the same campaign he mentioned with someone rocking up and telling people to cease fighting
Or, although not during a campaign, when a fight we had was mentioned in Orgrimmar by the Horde party in ear-shot of someone, they logged onto some high-ranked NPC to tell them off.
I think we had an alliance special forces guild drop out because the fighting had become too high profile and they’d lost the ability to justify their presence.
Honestly? Kudos for sticking with the lore and not bending it to justify their presencs.
Claiming your character speaks with the authority of the literal king is just baseline bad RP
Imo if that happens the organizers should make a call on wether to do something with it
but if the organizers are against it then I’m sorry mr hand of the king
Personally if I was organizing an event I would be a bit miffed if players would just start making npcs for it without my know how or atleast involvement
True, the trick is to not accept a piece of paper
or ask to see it and eat it infront of them for comedic value
still tho if you come to my event with a character that claims to speak with the authority of an NPC so high up the hierarchy that the NPC could realistically shut down the whole IC operation my event is based on, which means OOC ending my event or campaign, I will take that as a hostile attempt at griefing, esp. if they claim that the character is himself also an npc character.
I could see it potentially work if the person claiming authority actually is aware OOC that they got straight up none and willing to actually play out if people defy them beyond just “Im telling the King!” and angry whispers.
However, I do think it would then also be courtesy of them specifically to check if its okay with the other party(in this case you) as it could potentially completely derail whatever plans you had for the event.
Oh yeah definitely, I kind of assumed the scenario I put down as someone who just shows up trying to put a bomb under a campaign that may have been weeks in planning
Approaching organizers to chip in is often received well, even if the provided ideas aren’t always accepted
I don’t think any organizer of a campaign or more elaborate storyline is happy when someone rocks up to their event with <Envoy/Delegate/Agent of a Higher Authority> in their TRP and does a QA session over whether what they’re doing is legitimate, efficient or aligns with what they assume is the standard others should base their Role-Play on.
Yeah, I completely get you. I’ve seen my share of that more than once on the server.
Primarily during RP-PvP campaigns. There’s always one or two guilds that show up often unannounced and demand everyone stop fighting or else. Followed by complaining in whispers, metagaming/godemoting and occasionally a forum post trying to call out people for “breaking the lore”.
In a perfect world, the standard would always be to ask people if encountered if its alright if they join or intrude on the event. Or if it’s not something they’re even interested in, to just leave them alone.
Sadly not everyone seem to think that is logical and will instead try to disrupt.
End of the day, people are going to do what they think is fun, regardless.
I’m on the whole ‘there’s no fighting going on at all’, so whilst I think RPPvP is breaking some lore, it doesn’t affect me - as long as others are having fun.
Welcome to my MrglTalk.
People who go “I’m telling/go talk to High Command” are just vibe killers, just respond to my own character and what he is doing instead, why dismiss the RP towards a path that just becomes an arms race of who’s the most High Commandy?
I feel like a lot of the best RP-PvP I’ve had has been on such a small scale that at times, it’s just two characters who really, really want one another dead, and they’ll beat each other up in the woods like it’s a Wetherspoons car park
I get where you’re coming from, and throwing a wrench in the narrative by making one’s own character a hindrance (when not coordinated OOC, obviously) is more than a bit naff on organizers. Downright horrid if said character is supposedly some figure of authority close to the Alliance leadership.
However.
Characters voicing concerns or objecting to breaking the truce, for instance, is something organizers should expect at this point. It has been the in-universe reality of things for half a decade by now. Intentionally breaking that tenuous pact, for whatever reason, isn’t likely to reflect well on those involved - nor is it likely to remain a closely guarded secret if enough people are involved.
Does this mean that sort of RP shouldn’t be organized? Heck no!
With that being said, incorporating snippets of consequences into the RP of those involved would not be amiss. “Our C.O. chewed me out for two hours once we got back from the field. We’ll have to be more careful in the future” - or some similarly harmless, off-screen fluff. Something that acknowledges that things aren’t smooth sailing for either faction’s more violently inclined characters, while not obstructing RP in the slightest.
As per my OP its inconsequential, hence the main grievance is when such individuals claim to be representing some figure or organization of absolute authority. Which is, as far as anyone’s concerned, a big no-no if there’s been no agreement beforehand about it.