Idea on Capture RP

[Ghost]

Rules for anything, anywhere, are never going to eradicate behaviour. They are there as deterrance that serves at the very least to mitigate behaviour. That's all you can ever do.

Again, I am very, very interested in hearing comprehensive suggestions for alterations of the rules. They're never going to be perfect, as I just pointed out, but the current ones are the best we've managed to come up with so far. So before you think "this is the best you can do?!", consider what the best you can do is.

[Mac]

Very well, The best I can do is to suggest is a change in policy regarding how the rule is enforced. The rule itself is fine as it stands. I certainly don't have any better ideas. However capture RP should be evaluated on a case by case basis. If everyone is in OOC agreement and having a good time with their RP, Then the 72 hour rule should only be applied if, or when it becomes necessary. That's my two cents.

[Ghost]

And what if everyone says they are in agreement, but one or more says so because of coercion?

[Mac]

Then such is life.

Not that I feel nothing for someone who might be giving OOC consent only because of coercion. But if after being contacted (or contacted privately) a player is still claiming to be a willing and happy participant in the RP, Then I would like to assume that is the truth.

You can't go killing every shark in the ocean because some might bite. Not with out effecting all the fishes in the sea. Hmmm... not sure about that analogy. Might have something to do with a jaws marathon being on tv last night.

[mrm3ntalist]

Then such is life.

This applies to the current situation. Like it or not, Such is life

[Mac]

This applies to the current situation. Like it or not, Such is life

True that

[Xanfyrst]

Cecilia was captive of the Zhentarim for 4-5 days. Our members at the time all interacted with her in some capacity, so she was never forced to be on a different character or offline because her character was imprisoned. We also made sure to ask her about her character's imprisonment and if everything was fine.

My character Eliphas wanted to chop her hand off (he's a former Tyrran-turned-Banite, she was a Tyrran at the time... the irony and symbolism...) and we discussed the part in detail, but she eventually said no and that was it. That she later regretted her decision in hindsight is a different matter, but the point was that I and every Zhentarim member of the time constantly made sure she was fine with things as it was an important bit of RP and character development for several characters involved like Eliphas, Telia, Ameris, Ambrose and especially Cecilia herself.

I have though been part of an incident that created a lot of havoc in the NWN2 community 5-6 years ago or so, when I was guild leader of the Hellstorm crew and we were recruiting potential members. One guy didn't show ANY signs of being uncomfortable with the RP and didn't say anything when we asked him, AND the other recruit said he had fun... yet in the end the guy went offline right after and started a week long crusade against me and BG that costed me a 30 day long ban, which I still think was unfair btw.

So... roleplaying something "uncomfortable" is a two-edged sword. Some like it, some don't. Some say when they don't feel comfortable with it, others keep their mouth shut about it and suffer in silence... and then someone isn't saying anything until later and hell goes ablaze. It's hard to understand human psyche at times and nowadays I rarely do anything "extreme" unless I know the roleplayer(s) well, like I did with fx. Ameris (Kleomenes) and Cecilia (Hidennka).

[SharpGn2]

So here are my two cents on this topic,

I’ve played NWN/NWN2 going on 14 years (Gods) and I’ve had a multitude of PC’s that have been captured/jailed/tortured/even perma’d at the end, and these have been some of the better experiences RP wise, and most memorable, I can recall. These events build a character, shape them through their experience, and cause cogs and wheels to start turning in order to mitigate/etc (Jailbreaks, political talks, conflict). These events were never random, and certainly were not poorly roleplayed. Everyone knew what they were getting into – those that attempted capture expected potential consequences, political ramifications, etc – and of course, I knew it was possible that my character could be defeated and dragged away as was their intent.

To address the original topic, I do not like the idea that the entirety of capture is ‘forgotten’. This turns the interaction to a one-way street, where those that capture can feel relatively safe from consequences from their actions, as no one can really ‘know’ without meta. I’ve always been a little iffy on ‘forgetting’ PvP stuff anyways, but that is a different topic for another discussion. Here, I think it is very difficult to make someone forget several days of capture. Yes, there are spells of the ninth circle that can do this, but such powerful magics are (generally) few and far between, and there are very few mundane methods of applying amnesia to this very specific effect. Not to mention, this makes roleplaying, and the significance of interactions between players involved, nil. On a roleplaying server, I find that difficult to stomach as standard. I’ll touch on this more in a moment.

As of the last few entries, the question is a concern of OOC agreement leading to a concern of coercion. I feel particularly strongly about this subject, so prepare thyselves for some words. I agree with Mac’s latest posts. As it stands currently, the 72 hour rule, if enforced strictly, which rules/laws/ect are in the eye of the enforcer, so this no doubt varies from DM to DM, will potentially cut off meaningful RP that will move characters forward (add 57 more commas somewhere). The idea that we all need to watch the clock and suddenly ‘break’ at the seventy-second hour, regardless of RL responsibilities, time-zone differences, etc is something that makes this a very difficult standard.

“And what if everyone says they are in agreement, but one or more says so because of coercion?” – DM Ghost

That is something that need be expressed and understood by the playerbase. There needs to be a certain expectation placed on the players that, when the OOC interactions and questions are being asked, they need to be honest and upfront, or face the consequence. I’m sorry, but you cannot base a rule or law in this case (Yes, IRL there are laws but these often involve physical violence in coercion – that’s simply not the case here – and no rule in BG is going to curb *that* behavior if somehow its between player and player) on the inability of a player to voice their concern and their comfortability. By saying nothing, the automatic presumption (in court as well) is consenting.

‘qui tacet consentire videtur’ – a latin proverb that means ‘he who is silent is understood to consent’

I feel for those that feel a certain social pressure and wish to simply go along with this, but this is a consequence of that individuals silence and not speaking up – otherwise, I would need to interrogate everyone I rp’ed with to ensure that everything we did together was absolutely ok. We don’t have the time or ability to do this, so this as a basis is faulty at best and should not be written into rules/law. If someone is uncomfortable about RP we are partaking in, whether it be a fireside chat at the FAI, hunting monster spawns, or this, I have a base expectation to receive a PM informing me along these lines. In the case of this capture RP, if you do not speak up during the reasonable OOC discussion precluding the events, then you are understood to consent, and something like what happened to Xanfyrst is absolutely outright and seems terribly handled – but that is a digression.

I think 72 hours should not be a hard limit, but a soft one. After all, this applies to jailing as much as capture, if I am to understand? Criminals only jailed 3 days for heinous crimes seems a laughable joke at best – and it takes away the deterrent, consequence, and risk of committing the act. I think what is reasonable is that 72 hours be a ‘soft’ limit. What do I mean by this? That if, for whatever reason, the capturers do not forward the RP/plan any getting together with the captured/etc, that with an approaching 72 hour limit, the captured makes it clear ‘hey, are we going to do something with this or nah?’ and if receiving nothing, document it to a DM and move on. Case by case basis is best applied here, within reasonable expectations. Sometimes it might take 72 hours for all players involved to be able to play again – they shouldn’t be punished, especially if everyone is onboard, for continuing rp.

At the end of the day, this entire scenario is about consequences. What I’m worried about, with what I am seeing here, is that consequences don’t matter. . . and if that’s the case, this undermines the very fabric of roleplay, which is all about the stories and interactions we create – and what makes the basis of a story? Conflict and it’s resolution. If there are no perceived consequences (captured forget everything/only 3 days/lets just move on) there is no real risk/motivation/or even reward for doing any of this at all. I honestly feel that, if so restricted, you might as well simply say ‘Only NPCs can capture’ and go to an extreme, because what the current is feels like a half-arsed move in that direction – a compromise that isn’t one, really at all, as it doesn’t promote the RP that could be.

[grymhild]

what SharpGn2 two said +1