CNRPA Discussion, GM Powers

[Lysergide]

I think it is time to address the current GM powers for CNRPA due to the excessive manner in which they handled the Alaskan Crisis. I think we have moved far enough within ourselves to address their powers and restructure what they can and cannot do. There are certain parts of the rule set that would allow the GM's to show favoritism and the vagueness of certain sections isn't ideal anymore.

[Mogar]

I question the capability to set up an NPC nation at the very least, since the players have been told that RPing NPCs is generally a nogo.

[Yerushalayim]

I see no issue with GMs informing players to find a way to advance a RP, or the GMs will do it. It's pretty explicitly stated in the GM roles that part of the GM's job is to keep RP moving forward.

[Hereno]

tbh i'm cool with it

they've presented a scenario for you. that's normal gm behavior.

plus, it says in the rules that white space has military presence.

still, if both dillon and mogar really hate the idea, it would be a nice gesture to say "alright fine we won't do it"

[Yerushalayim]

tbh i'm cool with it

they've presented a scenario for you. that's normal gm behavior.

plus, it says in the rules that white space has military presence.

still, if both dillon and mogar really hate the idea, it would be a nice gesture to say "alright fine we won't do it"

One of the alternatives, within the rules, is for us to flip a coin and tell them who wins the war, followed by rolling percentiles and telling them how many of their forces they lose. I figured they'd prefer some RP instead of just "You lose, take x% casualties. You win, take y% casualties". But hey, who knows. Seems folks don't actually like the idea of RPing when there's risk. :P

[Mogar]

I prefer RP that's not under the barrel of a gun, of course that would mean the GM team actually being collaborative too.

[Yerushalayim]

Our job's to keep the RP flowing. If you get into a conflict RP with someone else, and then you decide not to collaborate (or they decide not to), it's our job to unstick the gears. This allows your forces to be redeployed at the end, resolves the conflict, and moves the storylines forward once more. As you all have been told, so long as you're moving the RP forward, we're not going to get involved except to smack down things that shouldn't be happening (e.g.: Rping a functional government in Alaska that's on your side, or RPing your rival's forces). But if you refuse to work together, and just argue with each other, and ask for retcons of the little RP that you do engage in, then something's going to be done to unstick it all.

[Mogar]

and yet, none of those things you have supposedly smacked down have been modified at all in the RP.

[Markus Wilding]

If there is a rule against players RPing NPCs, then a lot of stuff in the Polish Problems thread needs to be wiped - Director, Euphaia, Tidy and Lysergide were all RPing Polish and Prussian resistance. (If I understand the aim of the rule)((Still on mobile))

[Mogar]

That is also why Director does not like France ICly, due to FHIC accepting refugees, guess the whole thing would have to be wiped!

[Captain Enema]

Shouldn't you boys be posting on your Alaskan rp rather than crying about the injustice of it all?

[Lysergide]

Part of a GM's job is encourage roleplay to keep moving along. To that end, on occasion, the GM team can award additional naval points, squadrons of aircraft, or troops to nations engaged in armed conflict for cooperating with each other and being respectful to each other and the GM team.

 

I would like this section changed and the removing of the ability to give any advantage to another player. It opens up the ability for favoritism to exist. Such I believe that it should be axed.

Because not all situations and GM powers and responsibilities are covered, the GM team has a certain measure of discretionary power to resolve disputes or to take action. The discretionary power clause should not be seen as a permanent solution, but more a short term means of keeping the community peace or moving an rp forward.  No permanent changes to CNRP Ascending rules can be made through the use of this clause without a community vote.

 

I really don't see the need for this listed as a GM Power, considering it has already been shown that this power has the potential for huge abuse. What stops with creating an NPC nation run by the GM's, and them using it to war both parties and the GM's allowing said nation to have an unlimited amount of men, ships, planes, and missiles to lob. The rules listed in the Dick Rule section of the rules provides them with more than enough power to deal with situations. Arbitration was poorly done with this situation, and has opened the door for potential abuse.

[Californian]

So I agree with the idea and sentiment expressed in the original post and believe in a community of understanding, reasonable RPers the GMs should have less power when keeping the RP moving.

 

However, this community has been shown time and time ago to not behave that idealistically. Sometimes GMs need to have the authority to make decisions that can have immediate, large impacts and I think that is in part the reason for CNRPA, and what separates it from CNRP2, in the first place. I trust the GMs and believe that a large level of flexibility is needed for when they have to deal with the crap this community thinks up. 

[Mr Director]

If there is a rule against players RPing NPCs, then a lot of stuff in the Polish Problems thread needs to be wiped - Director, Euphaia, Tidy and Lysergide were all RPing Polish and Prussian resistance. (If I understand the aim of the rule)((Still on mobile))

 

Fhic rp'd Polacks teleporting France, and you also rp'd putting down some Polish nationalists while the area was still white space, iirc.

 

If all of that needs to be wiped, then we should also wipe all those Hope Float thingies, since they all rp'd local populations in one way or another. In fact, we would need to wipe almost every mention of Poland, since they all made some reference to the White Army yadda yadda. This includes that three way diplo thing between Alvonia, Poland, and Hungary, and just about every diplo thread made by France.

 

We would also need to wipe every mention of the Hope Floats in the League of Nations thread.

 

That being said, I don't think there should be a blanket rule against rp'ing NPCs. 

 

The simple fact is, there are simply too few nations. Those nations that do exist are basically clumped together in Europe, Asia, and North America. You can't rp things like aid programs in Africa, placing sanctions on crazed Latin American dictators, fighting Iraqi terrorists, etc. without making use of white space characters. This was especially true when we were unable to claim protectorates for the first thirty days of rp, else I could have just grabbed half of Poland, and then done the rp there. Else my only option would be to split off massive chunks of my nation, have a bunch of Polish terrorists show up, magically take over, and then fight them. Now, before you all go off on how that is exactly what I should have done, I would ask you to take a look at the map. I don't exactly have a massive amount of land to begin with, and in all honesty, Belarus barely exists as a nation with the land it does have irl, I doubt it could exist icly if half of it was overrun with terrorists.

 

So really, its either make use of white space characters in order to make good rps, or we all confine ourselves to playing around with less than a quarter of the real life nations, and with about a half to three quarters of the RL population. And no black people :P

 

 

That is also why Director does not like France ICly, due to FHIC accepting refugees, guess the whole thing would have to be wiped!

 

That's Mr. Director to you!

Edited January 4, 2015 by Mr Director

[Yerushalayim]

As clarification: The GMs haven't said people can't ever RP NPCs. That's a strawman being slung up against us. We've shown (between Poland, the Hope Floats, and the Bulgaria situation) that we've got no issue with it, when done with sense. :P TBM's got a discussion going to codify a rule for how we handle RPing NPCs, which is most certainly not the same as going "neener neener neener you can't do it!"

[Captain Enema]

 

Part of a GM's job is encourage roleplay to keep moving along. To that end, on occasion, the GM team can award additional naval points, squadrons of aircraft, or troops to nations engaged in armed conflict for cooperating with each other and being respectful to each other and the GM team.

 

I agree that this should be scrubbed. We haven't used it yet, but I don't like how flimsy it is. 

[Lysergide]

So I agree with the idea and sentiment expressed in the original post and believe in a community of understanding, reasonable RPers the GMs should have less power when keeping the RP moving.

 

However, this community has been shown time and time ago to not behave that idealistically. Sometimes GMs need to have the authority to make decisions that can have immediate, large impacts and I think that is in part the reason for CNRPA, and what separates it from CNRP2, in the first place. I trust the GMs and believe that a large level of flexibility is needed for when they have to deal with the crap this community thinks up. 

 

I agree that they should be given some level of power to deal with situations on the fly, but I think everything should be done within reason, and there shouldn't be an exercised abuse of this power, as in it should have some checks and balances for it.

[Captain Enema]

The situation I proposed would have been very unbalanced in mogar, piddy, and dillon's favor. Three military powers facing three divided groups of insurgents. All three of them having technology that far surpasses that of the average Alaskan insurgent. All three of them having industrial support, financial support, and far deeper reserves of population. The three GMs with limited weapons, funds, manpower, and equipment. 

 

Of course we GMs were going to win, not because of our stats and skills, but because they already conceded defeat from the get go. They literally threw in the towel and went on a last minute diplomatic blitz to avoid facing three people they would have vastly overmatched. 

 

Ok. 

 

gotcha.

 

 

LOL.

 

Edited January 4, 2015 by Tidy Bowl Man

[Maelstrom Vortex]

The way the world is balanced I think the GMs should rp npcs when the players aren't adequately accounting for the reaction of surrounding white space areas. I am willing to trust the GMs not just as the game managers, but as fellow players. If we're ever going to make progress we need to keep things fair and simply talk about our disagreements in how the story should progress. Everyone needs a moment of glory, a fall, no one should ever totally dominate.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Captain Enema]

The way the world is balanced I think the GMs should rp npcs when the players aren't adequately accounting for the reaction of surrounding white space areas. I am willing to trust the GMs not just as the game managers, but as fellow players. If we're ever going to make progress we need to keep things fair and simply talk about our disagreements in how the story should progress. Everyone needs a moment of glory, a fall, no one should ever totally dominate.

 

Now had you sound this rational on irc I might have actually enjoyed our conversation rather then spending half my morning ignoring you. 

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Now had you sound this rational on irc I might have actually enjoyed our conversation rather then spending half my morning ignoring you.

When I'm battling others in discussion the core of my ideas are frequently lost to the noise generated.

[Captain Enema]

Your ideas generally get lost in a sea of blither blather. Who knew dragons were such mighty gabblers?

[Maelstrom Vortex]

Everyone? :P

[Maelstrom Vortex]

I now agree with Lysergide, we do need to consider greater restriction of GM powers. I come to this agreement after I discovered some GM's are willing to force consensual wars to be non-canon simply on the basis of the rules for the war agreed upon by two consenting players which is a definite over-reach beyond their intended role. I consider this a violation of trust with the community which shows, yes, their powers need further regulation.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Maelstrom Vortex

[Captain Enema]

Gabble gabble gabble gabble.

 

/me gets out his pitchfork and torches.