Ooc

[Eborne1]

@Starhawk Your err is accounted for. Thank you for clarifying. It's why I asked. It shouldn't be a stretch to recognize how your mistaken post would stir the confusion.

Please don't misquote me. I said they "are basically surrendering" and perhaps that's incorrect, but they HAVE surrendered the prisoner which happens to be our current mission, at present, and probably shouldn't be considered such a frivolous thing as your post seems to suggest.

And please stop being so contentious with every little thing. You've developed the reputation for it on MW and it gets annoying. I didn't care to see the passive aggressive posts about the last player you didn't like in this game and I don't like feeling like I can't try to clarify my confusion without being trashed every time for it because you feel your competency is being threatened. I shouldn't have to feel like I'm walking on eggshells all the time to enjoy a MW game.

Lighten up.

Edited March 5 by Eborne1 (see edit history)

[Starhawk]

1 hour ago, Eborne1 said:

@Starhawk Your err is accounted for. Thank you for clarifying. It's why I asked. It shouldn't be a stretch to recognize how your mistaken post would stir the confusion.

Please don't misquote me. I said they "are basically surrendering" and perhaps that's incorrect, but they HAVE surrendered the prisoner which happens to be our current mission, at present, and probably shouldn't be considered such a frivolous thing as your post seems to suggest.

And please stop being so contentious with every little thing. You've developed the reputation for it on MW and it gets annoying. I didn't care to see the passive aggressive posts about the last player you didn't like in this game and I don't like feeling like I can't try to clarify my confusion without being trashed every time for it because you feel your integrity is being threatened. I shouldn't have to feel like I'm walking on eggshells all the time to enjoy a MW game.

Lighten up.

I don't feel I was being contentious in this instance. I asked the DM to clarify. I was, I admit, somewhat taken aback when a character I believed I'd amply represented as showing restraint, kindness and mercy, somehow did not come across that way. That seemed to come out of nowhere.

I can appreciate how others might see me as being contentious. I am fine, I believe, until I am presented with God Moding.. players dictating what will happen in regards my, and others, characters, since I feel that's just taking cheap shots. There are more than a few players who do that.

I am not a fan of players who attempt to put antipathy into narrative.. you know the kind of thing.. 'Character A ignores the 'wittering' of Character B'. PC's should not be allowed to defame other PC's so. This, to me, is an attempt to tie the hands of another player behind their back (since nothing was communicated outside of internal thoughts), slap them silly and then call it 'character expression'. There are more than a few players who do that.I just don't believe it's the players right to dictate the reality of 'this and that' where it relates to other characters. I believe that's the DM's job.

The only other thing that aggravates me is when every PC a player ever plays showing antipathy to every PC another player plays. That's bare hostility. For my part, when I encounter such, I choose to deliberately avoid these people on account of their ungentlemanly conduct, to the point of not putting myself forward for games they're in. I don't think it's too much to ask that people play fairly and I think you would agree that there are quite a few players that don't.

I've played in Rakle's games for years without contention, as far as I can recall. Indeed, I've played in the vast majority of games I've been in without being 'contentious', and am becoming even less contentious over time... going so far as to not engage with people coming after me in OOC.

For my part, I have zero problem with you in any way, shape or form. Indeed, I think your rp'ing of Madame Zelda is inspired, frankly so much so that I cannot help but note 'precedents' that appear to be of the day and night variety. I'm sorry, you've taken that as anything but a reflection of my enjoyment of Zelda. That was not my intention.

I hope that, in addition to my reputation for being prickly, people have noted that I don't ghost, or leave players waiting weeks for my post, or post without reference to what's come before in previous players' posts. I also don't god mode, write objectionable stuff in narrative and avoid situations where I have to rp with people who wind me up.

Edited March 5 by Starhawk (see edit history)

[Eborne1]

43 minutes ago, Starhawk said:

I don't feel I was being contentious in this instance. I asked the DM to clarify. I was, I admit, somewhat taken aback when a character I believed I'd amply represented as showing restraint, kindness and mercy, somehow did not come across that way. That seemed to come out of nowhere.

I can appreciate how others might see me as being contentious. I am fine, I believe, until I am presented with God Moding.. players dictating what will happen in regards my, and others, characters, since I feel that's just taking cheap shots. There are more than a few players who do that.

I am not a fan of players who attempt to put antipathy into narrative.. you know the kind of thing.. 'Character A ignores the 'wittering' of Character B'. PC's should not be allowed to defame other PC's so. This, to me, is an attempt to tie the hands of another player behind their back (since nothing was communicated outside of internal thoughts), slap them silly and then call it 'character expression'. There are more than a few players who do that.I just don't believe it's the players right to dictate the reality of 'this and that' where it relates to other characters. I believe that's the DM's job.

The only other thing that aggravates me is when every PC a player ever plays showing antipathy to every PC another player plays. That's bare hostility. For my part, when I encounter such, I choose to deliberately avoid these people on account of their ungentlemanly conduct, to the point of not putting myself forward for games they're in. I don't think it's too much to ask that people play fairly and I think you would agree that there are quite a few players that don't.

I've played in Rakle's games for years without contention, as far as I can recall. Indeed, I've played in the vast majority of games I've been in without being 'contentious', and am becoming even less contentious over time... going so far as to not engage with people coming after me in OOC.

For my part, I have zero problem with you in any way, shape or form. Indeed, I think your rp'ing of Madame Zelda is inspired, frankly so much so that I cannot help but note 'precedents' that appear to be of the day and night variety. I'm sorry, you've taken that as anything but a reflection of my enjoyment of Zelda. That was not my intention.

I hope that, in addition to my reputation for being prickly, people have noted that I don't ghost, or leave players waiting weeks for my post, or post without reference to what's come before in previous players' posts.

Your thoughtful and considerate response is highly appreciated.

I very much agree with you about the gaming plights you described, and agree that those are more severe than anything I have observed from you. It is only that, in my experience, some of your OOC responses come off as unnecessarily biting and that some few of your posts read as passive aggressive expressions of your feelings about a players choices. Several of the first posts I saw of yours in this game seemed to make such comments about the previous player.

I realize a lot can be misinterpreted in the translation to text and that perhaps that is not your intent. If I am mistaken, then I apologize. I, personally, try to completely disassociate myself from my characters to avoid this possibility. I also realize that that is not everyone's style, and some players prefer to embody their characters more than I.

---

Your timely participation in any game I've seen with you is very noteworthy and as I mentioned, your mature response above is appreciated.

Anhotep has very much seemed the patient pacifist thus far, hence my confusion at reading your (previously unknown to be) incomplete post. You had mentioned in OOC that Anhotep wanted to kill them, and so I figured you had decided to run with that. My clarifying question was not intended to be rudely suggestive or disrespectful.

I appreciate your compliments. I always try to add to the enjoyment of the narrative through my characters, whether it be descriptive, dramatic, or comedic writing. Your appreciation is flattering and I could easily say the same of most your own writing.

It is not my intent to create hostility and I thank you again for your clarifying reciprocation.

[Steel Warrior]

To be fair, the previous character that was replaced was like the opposite of "lets work together" to the point that they rubbed everyone the wrong way. It was at the point, why would we let this stranger join our group if they choose to act like that.

Nothing against the player behind the character, but how the character being played would not fit with our group. It was clear the character's personality was the deciding factor to find someone else.

[Starhawk]

31 minutes ago, Eborne1 said:

Your thoughtful and considerate response is highly appreciated.

I very much agree with you about the gaming plights you described, and agree that those are more severe than anything I have observed from you. It is only that, in my experience, some of your OOC responses come off as unnecessarily biting and that some few of your posts read as passive aggressive expressions of your feelings about a players choices. Several of the first posts I saw of yours in this game seemed to make such comments about the previous player.

I realize a lot can be misinterpreted in the translation to text and that perhaps that is not your intent. If I am mistaken, then I apologize. I, personally, try to completely disassociate myself from my characters to avoid this possibility. I also realize that that is not everyone's style, and some players prefer to embody their characters more than I.

---

Your timely participation in any game I've seen with you is very noteworthy and as I mentioned, your mature response above is appreciated.

Anhotep has very much seemed the patient pacifist thus far, hence my confusion at reading your (previously unknown to be) incomplete post. You had mentioned in OOC that Anhotep wanted to kill them, and so I figured you had decided to run with that. My clarifying question was not intended to be rudely suggestive or disrespectful.

I appreciate your compliments. I always try to add to the enjoyment of the narrative through my characters, whether it be descriptive, dramatic, or comedic writing. Your appreciation is flattering and I could easily say the same of most your own writing.

It is not my intent to create hostility and I thank you again for your clarifying reciprocation.

I am, I admit, sometimes unwantedly terse. Though I've never been medically tested, it's clear to me that I am borderline spectrum. While I believe wholeheartedly in gentlemanly conduct and sportsmanlike behavior I bounce over the line. As to the previous player, he decided to insult all the players from the get go. His PC then insulted every NPC she met. He also decided, unilaterally, that his character could jab another character in the chest.. ie. godmoding. He also went in for the antipathy narrative thing. Basically the unholy trinity. Then he topped it all with a cherry, by ghosting. This just wound me up and I let it get the better of me on this occasion. The game is a cooperative player undertaking and I take that very seriously, yeah too seriously.

Edited March 5 by Starhawk (see edit history)

[Steel Warrior]

@Starhawk Did you want to use diplomacy or intimidate when you asked them to surrender? lol

[Starhawk]

6 minutes ago, Steel Warrior said:

@Starhawk Did you want to use diplomacy or intimidate when you asked them to surrender? lol

Diplomacy.. but given what I am asking them to do.. I don't think they'll go for it.

[Eborne1]

I'm no bowl of sunshine myself. I'll work on my patience and how I frame my questions and we'll both work on our tact.

Sorry the last mage was a problem. It's what you get though for passing on Madame Zelda Mordeaux, as if there could possibly be anyone better than her for the task. 😉

[Terran]

Had surgery today. Should be out and okay to post tomorrow. NPC my character as needed.

 

[Starhawk]

The situation was starting to turn into something akin to a committee meeting. So, did something to get the game moving again. Not sure it was wise.. but I guess we'll see.

[Terran]

As a player, I'm surprised that the Thieves admitted that they kidnapped the Cleric b/c they were worried that the temple might come after them.

What possible reason could they have for such a concern unless they are either working with or opposed to the temple's interests?

In fact, they were so worried that the Temple might come after them that they risked kidnapping one of its priests who was snooping around, which is curious since that act would normally bring the Temple's attention to them.

More questions than answers, but in R.L. my gut would be conclusive that they are involved with the outbreak, possibly even working with foolish members of the Temple who might increase their power and influence by appearing to put down the invasion and save the City.

While the second part of the projected scenario seems unlikely, I can't rule out the possibility. The first part of the concept seems almost a lock to be true!

Edited March 9 by Terran (see edit history)

[Starhawk]

10 minutes ago, Terran said:

As a player, I'm surprised that the Thieves admitted that they kidnapped the Cleric b/c they were worried that the temple might come after them.

What possible reason could they have for such a concern unless they are either working with or opposed to the temple's interests?

In fact, they were so worried that the Temple might come after them that they risked kidnapping one of its priests who was snooping around, which is curious since that would bring the Temple's attention.

Yeah, the temple.. our patrons. On another point this is starting the same way for Anhotep as it did in Law Court.

 

[Steel Warrior]

I revised my post also, to possibly imply that they might be responsible for the outbreak.

Of course I only rolled a 2 (for 10) on sense motive :(

Edited March 9 by Steel Warrior (see edit history)

[Terran]

It's not likely that rogue elements within the Temple could be involved as I said, however it seems almost certain that the Guild is involved in the undead outbreak.

Perhaps they were only worried that the Temple might come after them AFTER they caught one of its priests snooping about.

Talking privately to the priest should reveal more information, or at least more questions!

Edited March 9 by Terran (see edit history)

[Starhawk]

This debate would work better if it were a tad faster and more folk were involved. Someone had to do something. Rakle was prompting us to try and pick up the pace. I'd be quite happy if someone else made the decisions, as long as the pace was maintained. In the absence of that..

Edited March 10 by Starhawk (see edit history)