CNRP & Realism

[Uberstein]

Megastructures, entire nations living in space, we all know what's there and I feel it could be useful to have a discussion on just what level of realism people actually want in CNRP. Should we say "who cares" like some people propose and build impossible* super structures that house millions of people or span continents? Or should we say "now wait a moment, this seems a bit silly, we should double check as a community to see if this is actually reasonable."

 

I realize this isn't much of an OP, but really I want to prompt a discussion.

 

 

*Impossible with current capabilities.

[Captain Enema]

Next there will be a demand that people rp their economy.

[Uberstein]

Next there will be a demand that people rp their economy.

I don't see a problem with people being asked to produce a very basic idea of it. Nothing substantial, but perhaps taking 5 minutes to google major exports of the land they have and the like.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

Megastructures, entire nations living in space, we all know what's there and I feel it could be useful to have a discussion on just what level of realism people actually want in CNRP. Should we say "who cares" like some people propose and build impossible* super structures that house millions of people or span continents? Or should we say "now wait a moment, this seems a bit silly, we should double check as a community to see if this is actually reasonable."

 

I realize this isn't much of an OP, but really I want to prompt a discussion.

 

 

*Impossible with current capabilities.

They're just having fun.  While I wish they would find more ways to tie their fun into CN, as long as it doesn't affect anyone else's RP, let them do it.  We don't allow these impossibilities with military, and that is what really matters.

 

I don't see a problem with people being asked to produce a very basic idea of it. Nothing substantial, but perhaps taking 5 minutes to google major exports of the land they have and the like.

I think most people do that already.  Then you RP a country that has boring exports (Soccer balls and tennis shoes?  Get it together Pakistan), and they deviate from real life.

[iKrolm]

They're just having fun.  While I wish they would find more ways to tie their fun into CN, as long as it doesn't affect anyone else's RP, let them do it.  We don't allow these impossibilities with military, and that is what really matters.

Yep, they're fun and a lot more interesting than the "Who will Tianxia invade next?" game.

[PresidentDavid]

Limiting creativity will be the death of CNRP - in my opinion. Having a nation in Antarctica or operating a nation where 90% of the people agree with everything or one nation consisting of China, Australia, Alaska, South America and now parts of Europe with little to no domestic uprisings may not be realistic but it does lead to interesting dynamics. Or how my country (Iceland) has ten times its RL population and that I can somehow feed all of these people when literally less than 1% of Iceland's land can be farmed /and / then I have plenty of money to spend on a Royal Family and support a big military. 

 

Implementing realism can restrict creativity and just make this an overrated CN instead of an underrated CNRP. I have grown tired of listening the entire community complain about the "legion of doom" that rules the politics of CNRP. I hate to admit this, but Sarah was right when she told me a long time ago that chaos makes things more fun. Every one on an equal playing field, at least for a little while, would be incredibly interesting. That's why I've always been in favor of a reset but... yeah. 

 

Regardless, CNRP doesn't need to be made more realistic than it is in my opinion. If I want to make an economically unfeasible country with fairy-worshiping..... blue haired people that have an odd obsession with islands and have a gold-backed currency then that is my choice! The great thing is that players are allowed to RP realistically. But just because one player likes to realistically conduct role play, that does not mean they should force it on others.

Edited April 13, 2014 by PresidentDavid

[jesbro]

Limiting creativity will be the death of CNRP - in my opinion. Having a nation in Antarctica or operating a nation where 90% of the people agree with everything or one nation consisting of China, Australia, Alaska, South America and now parts of Europe with little to no domestic uprisings may not be realistic but it does lead to interesting dynamics. Or how my country (Iceland) has ten times its RL population and that I can somehow feed all of these people when literally less than 1% of Iceland's land can be farmed /and / then I have plenty of money to spend on a Royal Family and support a big military. 

 

Implementing realism can restrict creativity and just make this an overrated CN instead of an underrated CNRP. I have grown tired of listening the entire community complain about the "legion of doom" that rules the politics of CNRP. I hate to admit this, but Sarah was right when she told me a long time ago that chaos makes things more fun. Every one on an equal playing field, at least for a little while, would be incredibly interesting. That's why I've always been in favor of a reset but... yeah. 

 

Regardless, CNRP doesn't need to be made more realistic than it is in my opinion. If I want to make an economically unfeasible country with fairy-worshiping..... blue haired people that have an odd obsession with islands and have a gold-backed currency then that is my choice! The great thing is that players are allowed to RP realistically. But just because one player likes to realistically conduct role play, that does not mean they should force it on others.

^ This

[Uberstein]

But shouldn't we strive to create a consistent narrative where everything works together well? Over and over again I've just seen people yell that they don't want concequences to their actions. Nuke the entire amazon rainforest? Why should THAT have negative repercussion? People just want to do the same thing over and over again, and don't want change apparently. And that isn't creative, that's just...self indulgence.

 

Wouldn't it be a more creative community if there was some framework in which we had to work within, where you couldn't just say "nope I magically avoid the problem!"? What drives conflict in real life? Resources, money, power. Imagine a CNRP where those things are actually taken into account. Realism leads to chaos, because the very nature of reality is unpredictable! The Russian invasion of Crimea had professional analysts completely stumped; you can't tell me that that's boring or status quo.

 

Realism would force people to stop and think, do research, and build upon actual possibilities. It would reduce the amount of arguments when war happens because we'd know what the tech does and how it works. We'd have a solid frame of reference for the possible and impossible. It would remove narrative inconsistencies. Maybe I'm just coming from a different RP background? Where I've overall learned to RP, I've learned that sometimes you need to RP the things that you don't want or like. That things can't always go your way. When I roll badly in a game, I have to accept those consequences. When I make a character, I have to build them within the confines of the setting and the game; I can't just make a high level DnD wizard in a Savage Worlds sci-fi game.

 

I guess my point is, I don't see realism as a hindrance. I see realism as a method to create a consistent narrative that overall would create a stronger RP. Because if there's an agreed upon standard, that's one less thing to argue about. I hope I at least make some kind of sense, even if people disagree with me.

[Captain Enema]

But shouldn't we strive to create a consistent narrative where everything works together well? Over and over again I've just seen people yell that they don't want concequences to their actions. Nuke the entire amazon rainforest? Why should THAT have negative repercussion? People just want to do the same thing over and over again, and don't want change apparently. And that isn't creative, that's just...self indulgence.
 
Wouldn't it be a more creative community if there was some framework in which we had to work within, where you couldn't just say "nope I magically avoid the problem!"? What drives conflict in real life? Resources, money, power. Imagine a CNRP where those things are actually taken into account. Realism leads to chaos, because the very nature of reality is unpredictable! The Russian invasion of Crimea had professional analysts completely stumped; you can't tell me that that's boring or status quo.
 
Realism would force people to stop and think, do research, and build upon actual possibilities. It would reduce the amount of arguments when war happens because we'd know what the tech does and how it works. We'd have a solid frame of reference for the possible and impossible. It would remove narrative inconsistencies. Maybe I'm just coming from a different RP background? Where I've overall learned to RP, I've learned that sometimes you need to RP the things that you don't want or like. That things can't always go your way. When I roll badly in a game, I have to accept those consequences. When I make a character, I have to build them within the confines of the setting and the game; I can't just make a high level DnD wizard in a Savage Worlds sci-fi game.
 
I guess my point is, I don't see realism as a hindrance. I see realism as a method to create a consistent narrative that overall would create a stronger RP. Because if there's an agreed upon standard, that's one less thing to argue about. I hope I at least make some kind of sense, even if people disagree with me.

Stop trying to force people to rp in the way you want them to do so.

[Mogar]

I'm sure most people would agree with you to the extent that economies would mean the empires we currently have would not exist, but since we have been RPing in a not realistic world for quite some time now, I cant imagine everyone suddenly agreeing to actually following realistic RP since it'd mean their empires would fall.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

There are resources, money, and power in this game, you just can't see them because the chinese took them all.

[Lynneth]

But shouldn't we strive to create a consistent narrative where everything works together well? Over and over again I've just seen people yell that they don't want concequences to their actions. Nuke the entire amazon rainforest? Why should THAT have negative repercussion? People just want to do the same thing over and over again, and don't want change apparently. And that isn't creative, that's just...self indulgence.

 

Wouldn't it be a more creative community if there was some framework in which we had to work within, where you couldn't just say "nope I magically avoid the problem!"? What drives conflict in real life? Resources, money, power. Imagine a CNRP where those things are actually taken into account. Realism leads to chaos, because the very nature of reality is unpredictable! The Russian invasion of Crimea had professional analysts completely stumped; you can't tell me that that's boring or status quo.

 

Realism would force people to stop and think, do research, and build upon actual possibilities. It would reduce the amount of arguments when war happens because we'd know what the tech does and how it works. We'd have a solid frame of reference for the possible and impossible. It would remove narrative inconsistencies. Maybe I'm just coming from a different RP background? Where I've overall learned to RP, I've learned that sometimes you need to RP the things that you don't want or like. That things can't always go your way. When I roll badly in a game, I have to accept those consequences. When I make a character, I have to build them within the confines of the setting and the game; I can't just make a high level DnD wizard in a Savage Worlds sci-fi game.

 

I guess my point is, I don't see realism as a hindrance. I see realism as a method to create a consistent narrative that overall would create a stronger RP. Because if there's an agreed upon standard, that's one less thing to argue about. I hope I at least make some kind of sense, even if people disagree with me.

I don't think it works like that, personally.

CNRP is, in its essence, a freeform Roleplay with some rules everyone agrees to. The players make the narrative themselves, for themselves. Sometimes they cooperate (most character RP), and there's one mechanic to force a semblance of cooperation (war), but those are still freeform elements and not otherwise restricted.

 

You want a consistent narrative, Uberstein. That is only possible if freeform is abolished and proper moderation instituted by a Game Master. I'm talking a proper Game Master, not the elected GMs with barely any power that we have. This GM would be, very much like one in D&D, Paranoia, Rogue Trader or any comparable P&P RPG, nearly all-powerful. They would have to have great creativity to keep the narrative going, to encourage players to continue playing within the confines that you want to set up for them.

 

I don't think that the history of this forum and its participants would lend itself to such D&D-esque Roleplay. I do not believe that abolition of Freeform RPing would help us any. Few, if any of us would favour such a thing, I believe, and it would only lead to the forum's slow, complete death. There may be some advantages, but I think the disadvantages would outweigh it for this community. Elsewhere, another community might be more receptive to P&P-esque RPing, but I don't think here. This RP-forum's legacy is built on relative freeform. Let's keep it like that.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Mon dieu, what is this thread? Honestly, can we at least abide by the bare minimum of realism? It'd be one horrible thing if all we have to really acknowledge is the brute force that murders our people. If there are not enough ressources, there should not be an abundance of it in RP and if we build some crazy construction, it should be within some limits. Yes, there should be some room for flavour RP, but it's becoming silly at some point.

 

Yep, they're fun and a lot more interesting than the "Who will Tianxia invade next?" game.

Having a nation in Antarctica or operating a nation where 90% of the people agree with everything or one nation consisting of China, Australia, Alaska, South America and now parts of Europe with little to no domestic uprisings may not be realistic but it does lead to interesting dynamics. 

There are resources, money, and power in this game, you just can't see them because the chinese took them all.

Also, this debate oozes of bitterness, which is not at all conductive for an actually valuable discussion.

[PresidentDavid]

You conveniently left out where I talked about the unrealistic aspects of my country.... This is not a partisan issue, everyone has been guilty of ot at some point. And FYI I enjoy silly. Don't tell me what I should or should not enjoy.

[Triyun]

People want selective realism or their false perceptions of realism.  CN RP is a selfish place where self interest reigns supreme.  Realism will always have a subjective definition to most people in order to try and stop others actions while enabling their own.  Nobody in CN RP is above it.  I wouldn't try to hard to alter aspects of RP.

[Zoot Zoot]

People can RP whatever the fuck they want to in internal RP's > Lyns civilization in space, he had terrestrial territory to invade and kill him. Zombies > internal RP, these things do not affect anybody else in CNRP unless they want to be involved.

RP's which affect other players, like say, exploding a bioweapon with the zombie virus in another country without preplanning it, doesnt need to be recognised because it is a fantastical RP.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

You conveniently left out where I talked about the unrealistic aspects of my country.... This is not a partisan issue, everyone has been guilty of ot at some point. And FYI I enjoy silly. Don't tell me what I should or should not enjoy.

No, that's covered by the first part of my post.

[Dillon1102]

 
Every one on an equal playing field, at least for a little while, would be incredibly interesting. That's why I've always been in favor of a reset but... yeah. 
 

I wanted to pull this up because in my opinion I am totally in favor of a reset or the creation of a second CNRP. That would start earlier in time. Maybe around the 1700s or something.

[PresidentDavid]

I wanted to pull this up because in my opinion I am totally in favor of a reset or the creation of a second CNRP. That would start earlier in time. Maybe around the 1700s or something.

That has already been done one, possibly two times.

[Dillon1102]

That has already been done one, possibly two times.

Well you know what they say, Third times a charm!

[Evangeline Anovilis]

If we talk about colonial era RP, that's been done maybe two times. Alternative eras, from medieval, to space and Westeros, we had it all. And we see where it ended up.

[PresidentDavid]

Hunger Games RP! Lol

[Dillon1102]

As one of the newest members could someone explain what happened

[Evangeline Anovilis]

People thought they had some great new idea, a lot more people joined in, after at most two weeks, it was dead and people pretented it just did not exist.

[Generalissimo]

*Impossible with current capabilities.

Several impossible things like functional moon bases now exist for Countries in CyberNations.

People ought be 100% to play all of them in CNRP

I'm saying that as last holdout simulationist here.

Edited April 26, 2014 by Generalissimo