maybe the real rp-pvp was the friends we’d risk death for to sneak into their capital city to throw a brick through their window with a note asking for a scrap to the death in the bilgewater carpark we made along the way
2 Likes
Imho I am behind you here.
Someone pulling what looks like a power move on the DM is not okay, and if a quick IC attempt does not work, I would reach the player out and ask for their intention, as that would look like an OOC problem.
Then tell them the event is not meant to take that direction they envisioned. They’re welcome to stay, but we’re not wrapping things up because an emissary woke up and said: “you’re not going to do this! I speak for the King!”
It’s an OOC problem, I handle it OOCly.
2 Likes
Quite. Assuming any IC mantle of that caliber is indeed dubious on the best of days, and pretty horrid when used as a means to run disruption on RP - regardless of context.
2 Likes
honestly im not a massive warhound anymore since blizzard botched the last attempt at it in a narrative but i have to look at those people and wonder…is this fun for you? like. getting humiliated by people who dont give a monkey’s who are gonna keep going about their conflict and having fun while your standing there blowing a gasket because they wont listen to your king-given* authority? that fun for you bud? that more fun than going about your day and doing rp you enjoy while leaving others to do the same?
(*authority may not actually be given by a monarch. 90% likelihood your speaking to an asylum escapee.)
1 Like
Kind of reminds me how blood elves defended the blood elven comeback to Dalaran post-Purge times, during local conclaves.
https://imgur.com/a/until-they-didnt-UroL8v8
For a race that lives longer than 100 years - I personally don’t think you should be easily “forgetting” that and actually continuously remind that to everyone around you, like Aerilen a grumpy old man would.
5 Likes
A bigger issue is that Blizzard is just keeping us in this equilibrium-hell (at least until TWW which does seem to lay down a solid law on Horde & Alliance) and we as Roleplayers are just stuck between two sides of a frankly terrible writing situation that should’ve been dealt with 7 years ago by the story team to actually push forward one agenda or the other.
On one hand we have Thrall personally hunting down and executing all armistice-breakers, and on the other we have random DF NPCs saying they would’ve been fighting each other several months ago if not for the armistice (it was signed 2 years ago, not several months ago). Neither is wrong, neither is right and our equilibrium-hell is maintained by the powers-that-be, fracturing us into increasingly radicalised RP sects.
4 Likes
Even longer. The armistice was signed at the end of BfA, which was followed by 2 years of Slands and then 3 years of timeskip before we got DF and those NPCs that talk about fighting each other months ago.
There’s another aspect to it too: The RP-PvPers might have already integrated the armistice and reaction of factions at large into their campaign, which means that the “representative of the king” coming to stop their fight might be going completely against their guild/community/campaign storyline.
Also, and this is something I’ve mentioned in earlier comment in this thread, if Alliance Commander Jim Jimson says that Horde attacked them and is actively trying to destroy an Alliance farm/camp/village/whatever, Emmissary of the Crown, John Johnson, should be naturally inclined towards trusting the word of fellow officer within the Alliance.
However, what I’m guessing is far more likely to happen is that John Johnson will threaten Jim Jimson with execution if he doesn’t stop fighting the Horde, even if it means innocents will die. At that point, accepting the authority of this person might leave bad taste in people’s mouths because they will know this whole thing is likely to be OOC motivated.
1 Like
Ngl what you’re doing here is a bit weird, and borders on taking a character’s IC opinion OOCly.
A long-lived race could be grumpy for hundreds of years, true, but they could also look at the bigger picture and focus on what is important in the long-term.
If we go on the “ooh but they are pragmatic people” then the latter is even more plausible.
Both are entirely valid approaches and it’s a bit weird that you’re trying to single out a character because they don’t align with your IC (OOC?) take of the Purge.
If you envision them as a long-lived race, who has things change multiple times over, then you might aswell try to keep good relationships with people (allies come and go: you were first allied with the humans, now you’re allied with the same orcs who invaded your homeland what - 40/30 years ago? who knows if tomorrow you won’t fight alongside humans again)
I literally do not? I just posted an example that I could find for the sake of my own personal statement. You perceiving that as “me outing someone” is honestly a big you problem, Zaphius. I got nothing against the person on the screenshot, which was taken years ago, and we roleplayed occasionally without you being offended on someone else’s behalf.
Yes? Did I say otherwise? I just stated my opinion, which is again not my problem you don’t like it.
Edit:
And what makes you think my character likes orcs? Did you RP with me? Do you know what my character likes and dislikes? Or are you making assumptions, as per usual?
1 Like
The logic is that everything that player-characters do is too insignificant to warrant any reaction from anyone of note, therefore any attempt to appeal to the authority of NPCs will always be fruitless.
And even if the consequence is as simple as one character expressing their disagreement and pointing out the existence of an armistice, the players of the truce-breaking characters might not be interested in roleplaying out such a conversation or such consequences and may have absolutely no interest in the armistice aspect of the setting.
If that is the case, then such players should just be allowed to wage war in peace, rather than have to engage with an aspect of the setting that they don’t like because of other player-characters referencing that aspect, no matter how canonical that aspect is.
If these players don’t want their characters to deal with literally any consequences for truce-breaking whatsoever, even if it’s as simple as another character saying “I don’t like what you’re doing because you’re breaking the armistice,” then that’s their prerogative and people should respect that. People shouldn’t try and force each other to RP in ways that they don’t want to.
1 Like
Posting the name of someone uninvolved in a screenshot (taken years ago) to highlight a situation you disapprove + lightly making fun of their stance OOC isn’t respectful regardless of it being “outing” or not.
You can try to make the case about me - what does it say about me, that I don’t like people imposing their OOC view on a race, and then trying to mock people who don’t adhere to their headcanon? Yes, it does.
Does it say that I see a spark of the seed of toxicity that caused people to trash talk one another on discord behind each other’s back, and kind of harmed the blood elf community (which, mind you, I was never part of, but I think it is a shame it has dwindled so much)? Yes, it does.
Maybe I did have the wrong impression, but it did seem like your opinion was the one people were supposed to see as the only reasonable one:
Here it comes across as if you’re saying all members of the race should not be easily forgetting that moment, and because you disapproved of a more neutral/pacifist comment right above, they should hold a grudge against Dalaran and be very angsty and bitter about it - because, again, look at the people who aren’t, such bad RP!
Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but I do think it’s not appropriate. I’m not going to derail the thread further.
This is the sanest thing you’ve said in years
This guy gets it.
Though I would argue that the rest of the post is also relevant. Even if you don’t want to discuss it, I think that there’s more to this topic than that nihilistic device that you keep on going back to. It’s a useful gotcha for dismissing hostile trolls who want to grief you and cancel your events by appealing to NPC authority, but that’s about it.
Oh I don’t for a moment expect any tangible consequences to arise from anyone pointing out the armistice, save for them being that
Because it takes two to tango, and trying to force consequences on others isn’t known to go over all too well.
So to be concise: As far as I’m concerned, players attending armistice-violating events, advertised as such in advance, only to then try and obstruct things, shouldn’t be given the time of day. Whether intentionally or not, they’re a detriment to everyone around them at that point, and they should know better.
I think we’re just going to have to disagree on that one. I fundamentally do not abide the surgical pick-and-choose approach where the setting is concerned, regardless of how it comes into play IC.
And I’d like to think that I practice what I preach.
I’ve lost count of how many times self-proclaimed “the Shadowlands are real, I’ve been there!” meta-RPers earned a scoff and an eye-roll from my characters during that expansion… and I’ll level with you, I hate that entire expansion with a passion.
But it’s canon. It’s there.
So even in dismissing it as crazy talk IC, I’m not dodging around it being mentioned by someone, nor what my character would have to say about it.
Agreed on the part of others announcing themselves as arbiters of lore. It circles right back to my take on people showing up for events clearly labeled as truce-breaking, only to bring a soapbox and start preaching why everyone present is a traitor and in trouble. It’d be comparable to a priest showing up at a Warlock gathering intended to summon a Pit Lord, and then start throwing around holy water, decry the dark arts, and casually mention how their cousin is actually captain of the City Guard.
Setting aside those nincompoops for a second though, I stand by there being an underlying challenge with your take on the setting as a whole - armistice included. It’s not as if the armistice is some niche phenomenon most can easily forget about, and I think that’s a reason this sort of friction might not go away anytime soon. It’s simply too big of an element to disregard entirely, unless, I expect, you have a vested interest in doing so personally.
1 Like
It was already discussed and argued quite a few posts ago, I just don’t want to be a broken record.
I’ll leave the minutae details of what you’re pushing for the case-by-case interactions event organizers will have when they have to deal with (or dont want to) the implications of a good old Alliance vs. Horde skirmish.
And regardless of what the detractors say, it will always be fine to say that such skirmishes bear no weight or consequence 
Justice for Moltenstone…
2 Likes
the mountains do not forget and they do not forgive
2 Likes
This isn’t quite what I was on about. I’m not on about player’s who have characters that are anti-war, this is fine and as you said, expected. I’m on about random nobody NPCs.
But as said it’s a pet peeve of mine. I’m not looking to lose sleep over it / throw a big song and dance, it was simply on my mind when writing my og post and it IRKED me
3 Likes
In the spirit of this thread, and for old times sake!
A bit of light hearted fun.
11 Likes