This Week's Topic (5/03 to 5/10)
"Are Metagaming rules necessary?"
This one is simple. Does your average Roleplaying server require rules governing the use of the metagame? Should players be allow to transcend the knowledge of their character to speed things up a bit? What are the negatives and positives of removing these rules?
Definitions
roleplay- In essence, "playing a role". It is acting out a specific character or entity in a controlled environment: In this case, Mount & Blade: Persistent World.
roleplaying server- Any server, in this case a Persistent World server, that either has "Roleplay" in its name or whose admins support rules akin to roleplaying.
out-of-character (OOC)- Something pertaining to real life or the player(s) as opposed to the in-game roles/story.
in-character (IC)- Something pertaining to the in-game story or roles.
metagame- The metagame of any roleplaying environment are the real-life rules pertaining to the game's imaginary environment.
metagaming- The act of using out-of-character (OOC) information in the in-game environment, whether for streamlining, personal gain or by accident.
So, you've come to argue!
Jolly good. This is a "controlled" argument thread, created by yours truly.
It all started with an idea relayed to me by a friend... developed in a chain-letter... and then this.
I usually try to keep my own opinion out of the debate.
Start by reading the rules below than this week's argument above. Good luck!
What is this:
Stimulating Intellectual Discussion, silly! Didn't you read the Thread Subject?
In all seriousness this is a weekly, open but moderated discussion on a "Persistent-World"-related topic including but not limited to roleplaying themes, in-game mechanics and player psychology.
As the week's discussion goes on I will post points from either side (or sides) of the argument in the following post.
Rules:
- No single-sentence replies or comments.
Everything posted is expected to serve as a constructive addition to the discussion. The only case in which a one-liner is permitted is a note of agreement with another poster.
- Have some knowledge of what you're talking about.
Usually the definitions established above are more than enough of a source to start putting your opinion and its basis in the topic. But personal experience is definitely a plus.
- Don't make up facts.
You will be held accountable for every bit that comes out of that shiny pie hole of yours. Rough estimates and common knowledge is perfectly acceptable, but if you're mentioning anything that could be construed as "far-fetched", provide a screenshot or link.
- No bickering. Period.
If the topic is going as planned there should be none of this. You will not try to disprove another person; if their comment contains bigotry, mistruths or poor logic it will not be put up as a "credit" on the front page. I repeat, do not attempt to point out fallacies in another's post(s): I will take care of it.
- Subjects for debate will rotate weekly,
usually pertaining to a current event or "hot topic". PM me if you have an idea
Original Text
"Are Metagaming rules necessary?"
This one is simple. Does your average Roleplaying server require rules governing the use of the metagame? Should players be allow to transcend the knowledge of their character to speed things up a bit? What are the negatives and positives of removing these rules?
Definitions
roleplay- In essence, "playing a role". It is acting out a specific character or entity in a controlled environment: In this case, Mount & Blade: Persistent World.
roleplaying server- Any server, in this case a Persistent World server, that either has "Roleplay" in its name or whose admins support rules akin to roleplaying.
out-of-character (OOC)- Something pertaining to real life or the player(s) as opposed to the in-game roles/story.
in-character (IC)- Something pertaining to the in-game story or roles.
metagame- The metagame of any roleplaying environment are the real-life rules pertaining to the game's imaginary environment.
metagaming- The act of using out-of-character (OOC) information in the in-game environment, whether for streamlining, personal gain or by accident.
So, you've come to argue!
Jolly good. This is a "controlled" argument thread, created by yours truly.
It all started with an idea relayed to me by a friend... developed in a chain-letter... and then this.
I usually try to keep my own opinion out of the debate.
Start by reading the rules below than this week's argument above. Good luck!
What is this:
Stimulating Intellectual Discussion, silly! Didn't you read the Thread Subject?
In all seriousness this is a weekly, open but moderated discussion on a "Persistent-World"-related topic including but not limited to roleplaying themes, in-game mechanics and player psychology.
As the week's discussion goes on I will post points from either side (or sides) of the argument in the following post.
Rules:
- No single-sentence replies or comments.
Everything posted is expected to serve as a constructive addition to the discussion. The only case in which a one-liner is permitted is a note of agreement with another poster.
- Have some knowledge of what you're talking about.
Usually the definitions established above are more than enough of a source to start putting your opinion and its basis in the topic. But personal experience is definitely a plus.
- Don't make up facts.
You will be held accountable for every bit that comes out of that shiny pie hole of yours. Rough estimates and common knowledge is perfectly acceptable, but if you're mentioning anything that could be construed as "far-fetched", provide a screenshot or link.
- No bickering. Period.
If the topic is going as planned there should be none of this. You will not try to disprove another person; if their comment contains bigotry, mistruths or poor logic it will not be put up as a "credit" on the front page. I repeat, do not attempt to point out fallacies in another's post(s): I will take care of it.
- Subjects for debate will rotate weekly,
usually pertaining to a current event or "hot topic". PM me if you have an idea
Original Text
Whalen207 said:Dear Intellectuals, Administrators and...
...others, of the Persistent World Community,
I come to you humbly as a mere man. A man that simply loves a good argument. A good argument can resolve conflicts in a jiffy. But what is a good debate without structure? Any halfway-decent deliberation requires the two (or three, or four) sides to be "on the same page" -- That is, using similar sets of definitions to govern their argument(s). But in the confusing, hectic world of the internet, how can this ever be accomplished? Why, in a controlled thread, of course!
For those of you with the attention span to have reached this point, congratulations. You're a likely candidate to argue your opinion in a thread I will post up tomorrow, the topic of which will change (usually) weekly. Important Definitions will be established on the front page, and as the argument develops I will post points from either side(s) and, thankfully for you all, try to keep my own opinion(s) out of the debate. Now you might ask yourself, "Why would I waste my time on such a trifle?" Well good sir, aside from an opportunity to make yourself appear as a "total smartass" to the community, you will also have the chance to prove once and for all who is right and who is wrong. Points will be weighted, tallied and all that whatnot at the end of a week's worth of debate and the opinion of the victors will be logged for future generations to forever fawn over. So bring your friends! Bring your family! Spread this Mass-Mail around everyone on the Persistent World forums!
Notes:
- Topics may be visited more than once, but not so in less than a month.
- People who don't keep on topic will be, erm.. Shunned. You will be shunned.
- Topics will not be limited to Persistent World-specific subjects.
Sincerely,
That annoying guy,
Guard_Whale_Tosser