New Support Policy

Talk about anything TI here! Also include suggestions for the game, website, and these forums.

Moderators: Maeve, Maeve

User avatar
Buzz K[ir]ill
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:42 pm

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:15 pm

If I understand the intention of the new support policy, the aim is to ensure that people are learning about supports/subverts via roleplay, and not by metagaming the support show output, correct?

It's very confusing to be shown ICly relevant information and be told it's OOC and not actionable. For example, if I see that I'm not supported by Reeves in my output, am I supposed to pretend that my character has no idea whether the Reeves support him? If that's the case, why be shown that information at all?

If the problem is merely deductions about specific individuals due to our regrettably small pbase, etc., then can the policy be modified to reflect that -- instead of treating the entire output as OOC information?

Alternatively, could we maybe remove the ranking system and just keep the reputation, with perhaps the lowest 'unranked' value given a similar keyword as the lowest ranked value? That way, it would be impossible to OOCly tell whether you were receiving no support or just little support.

Otherwise, it seems to me that we shouldn't be seeing any support rank/reputation information at all if it's not ICly actionable in any way.
Last edited by Buzz K[ir]ill on Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kinaed
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:54 pm
Discord Handle: ParaVox3#7579

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:18 pm

Thanks for the comment - yes, we'd already submitted a note to Azarial to remove the top part of support show in accordance to this change. The bottom part of it seems reasonable.

In the meantime, until the change is made - and even after - if a character learns or deduces who supports/subverts them from the 'support show' command, it is to be treated as OOC info. This is why we've asked players to cnote when discovering someone subverts their character to let staff know what IC basis the character is aware to support their IC action.

User avatar
Buzz K[ir]ill
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:42 pm

Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:24 pm

Okay, that makes sense, thank you!

Starstarfish
2018 Cookery Contest Winner!
2018 Cookery Contest Winner!
Posts: 536
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 10:13 am
Discord Handle: Starstarfish#4572

Sun Dec 16, 2018 10:51 am

When I imagined the "top part" being removed that would mean ranking in Guilds etc. However, having now no basis of information of knowing current standing with the various Guilds as a Guildleader I admit is a bit difficult.

Geras
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:15 pm

There's an added layer here that who you can support code-wise doesn't necessarily reflect who you would support ICly due to the restriction of not restricting the same person through multiple alts. Both of my chars would ICly support Empena for example, but code wise I'm restricted to just one. I'd hate for the choice between which of the two will do the supporting to have IC consequences when ultimately it's an OOC issue.

User avatar
Buzz K[ir]ill
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2018 3:42 pm

Thu Dec 20, 2018 4:28 pm

Geras wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:15 pm
There's an added layer here that who you can support code-wise doesn't necessarily reflect who you would support ICly due to the restriction of not restricting the same person through multiple alts. Both of my chars would ICly support Empena for example, but code wise I'm restricted to just one. I'd hate for the choice between which of the two will do the supporting to have IC consequences when ultimately it's an OOC issue.
The OOC restriction is to protect against unfair IC consequences due to multiplaying, crossover, cliques. (If it does exist as a coded restriction. I actually don't think I've ever attempted to support the same PC on two different alts precisely because I figured it would be problematic and a policy concern.) Maybe a note about this restriction should be added to the helpfile?

I imagine it would be against policy to share IP to the same PC from two different alts during the same "support period" as well, but I don't think that's stated anywhere, and I'm not sure if it's codedly prohibited...

In any case, to your point... it's now more difficult than ever to tell who is/isn't supporting you. The only way there's likely to be IC consequences is if you explicitly tell someone "I will support you" and they end up getting their friends to investigate (if that's even possible, not really sure) and find out that you aren't actually supporting them. Unfortunately, I don't know of a good way to ICly communicate "I will support you in other ways that don't involve the support system" -- for those situations in which you can't codedly support due to alt conflicts. But maybe the point is that now that things are so obfuscated, it shouldn't be possible to easily surmise where the coded support is coming from (versus other kinds of support... moral, rumors, financial, etc.).

User avatar
Kinaed
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:54 pm
Discord Handle: ParaVox3#7579

Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:23 am

Generally speaking, we expect social support or subversion to be more personal than "I support the ruler on high in which I've never even interacted with", and two alts are not allowed to be involved in one another's RP. Thus, two characters shouldn't be so close to the same character as to allow or require support from both.

Geras
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:13 pm

Alliances between GLs is pretty natural though Kinky. I'm not arguing to get rid of the restriction - I get why it's there and I agree with it. I just hope people keep in mind that IC support can't always be reflected in code support for some really good policy reasons.

LonelyNeptune
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 8:02 pm

Sat Dec 22, 2018 12:50 am

Geras, I think what Kinaed is trying to express is that the situation you are describing should never happen. Because it would mean that two alts are heavily involved with the same character, and involved in one another's RP.

If you feel that both of your characters would have an IC reason to support [person], you might want to reassess the extent to which you are involving multiple alts with [person]. And distance yourself.

Geras
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:51 am

And how would you propose that? I have a Reeve that RPs with Reeve GLs and gets asked for support. I have a GL that gets approached by Reeve GLs as a fellow GL. It happens. My RP doesn’t happen that much in the latter group but my IC interests do align and I can’t help that.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests