Sargun II Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 No. I should not have my work erased simply because a childish RPer decides to invade on a whim. @Vince: I agree with Merger that the question was worded very wrongly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHAYD Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 No. I should not have my work erased simply because a childish RPer decides to invade on a whim. Actually, other RPers can invade for whatever IC reasons. It isn't required for them to invade you without telling you, but that is usually rare and considered very impolite though if they say they want to invade, that RPer and you will have to come up with plans on how the RP would flow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botha Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 (edited) Forced cooperation is not cooperation at all. The world is fine as it is. You should never have to RP something that you have no say in. For these very reasons, I obviously voted no. Forcing someone to RP something they don't want to is just godmoding in another suit of clothes. Also, I never see the entire group of RPers ever complying with such a rule, so good luck enforcing it. Obviously I would never abide by it, so by the reasoning of the original poster I would be excluded. Problem is I know many RPers who would abide by it but yet won't be excluding me from their general RP of the world. Click here for Botha's opinion on this matter... Edited January 17, 2010 by Botha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I agree with Sargun completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I'm stuck in the middle on this one, mostly due to the way the question is worded and the examples provided. I believe we should all act as a world and recognize the RP's happening all around us. As it stands now, that is how our world is. Everyone cooperates for the most part, get along and the such. The issue is when you have people that wish to be in the world and ignore everything around them (Junio). This is mainly why I do not recognize "Botha-Mode" RP (corrupt version Junio used), but respect the "Botha-Style" RP (version Botha and a few others use) because the latter recognizes what goes on around them. I think the community is fine the way it is and therefore vote no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezequiel Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I am going to have to vote No on this one. CNRP shouldn't be locked with a set of rules, it's up to the players, not the moderators, weather a nation should be recognized and welcomed or outright rejected and unwelcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I agree with Voodoo entirely in this ordeal. I therefore vote no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I believe the solution presented by Merger would probably actually be the best overall...if it could be implimented. Would those people voting no becuase they are against forced roleplay please stop. Many but not all of us already agree with and allow forced roleplay. How you ask? Its simple one of the current rules is that is you are invaded or have a war declared on you then you have to accept it or you lose your land. That is forcing roleplay on someone with the real threat of loosing all their land or having to become a puppet.If you are truly against forced roleplaying then you need to agrue against that rule and eithe rignore it or try and have it removed. Guys, Kevin makes a good point here. Are we simply ignoring him? For these very reasons, I obviously voted no. Forcing someone to RP something they don't want to is just godmoding in another suit of clothes. Also, I never see the entire group of RPers ever complying with such a rule, so good luck enforcing it. Obviously I would never abide by it, so by the reasoning of the original poster I would be excluded. Problem is I know many RPers who would abide by it but yet won't be excluding me from their general RP of the world. Click here for Botha's opinion on this matter... Oh, hah hah... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I voted no. I don't want to be punished for the stupidity of others. Also, Vince, you seem to make a lot of these polls. The world is working fine the way it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacharth Posted January 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Not these polls. This one I just want to end the constant debating between people whether CNRP is one game or a bunch of games. It's starting to annoy me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Not these polls. This one I just want to end the constant debating between people whether CNRP is one game or a bunch of games. It's starting to annoy me. I understand what you are saying. Some people are just fickle and don't want to play along, and they may be jerks, but we shouldn't punish them for it. I agree that it is incredibly stupid to assume that wars or natural disasters end right at a nation's borders, and that's why I usually join in a story when it's obvious that I should. However, there are some people who are either too busy to join in, or are in the middle of something else and don't want to be disturbed, or some other reason, so we need to think from their point of view as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitex Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 I voted "no" because people have/may bring OOC things into IC, an example being if something bad happens to someone IRL, then they wanna come on CNRP and nuke everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Would those people voting no becuase they are against forced roleplay please stop. Many but not all of us already agree with and allow forced roleplay. How you ask? Its simple one of the current rules is that is you are invaded or have a war declared on you then you have to accept it or you lose your land. That is forcing roleplay on someone with the real threat of loosing all their land or having to become a puppet.If you are truly against forced roleplaying then you need to agrue against that rule and eithe rignore it or try and have it removed. The question of wars and the sort of role playing encompassed by the OP option is very different. When some nation declares unplanned war on you for some very weighty reason like "LULZ" you have the option to counter the attack through your own defenses or asking for and getting other nations to support you, in short these are man made alternatives to man made crises. However the OP conceptualizes a RPer being able to create natural catastrophies, against which there are no man made defenses. Nobody should have the right to RP the Wrath of God!! Just imagine what would happen!! Someone gets mad and BOOOM earthquake, Tsunami etc etc. Such widespread natural disasters are better left to the discretion of the RPers involved. In the Dragonisian earthquake, mael RPd an earthquake in his nation, I RPed limited effects in my nation, and Kaiser melech rped some effects in his nation. It was a cooperative gesture, and not forced. If it was forced it would not have had the synergy that was obtained in that thread. The issue is not just forced role play, it is also that not all CNRPers are as sane and wise as you may wish them to be, and I dont want the fate of my RP nation to be irrevocably held hostage to stupid people who dont have the patience and creativity to write out any RPs and are only interested in random destruction of others' RPs. If you want to RP a global catastrophe, talk to the people involved, ask them whether they would want to participate in such a thing, else create a local catastrophe for yourself and hope and pray that your neighbors join in and make it a global one as a ripple effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) There are two problems here. 1: There are people that don't roleplay as much as others. Not Everyone is a hyper dedicated role player spending more forum time than a 40 hour paying job to twink out their RP nation abilities and super character developments. Forcing everyone to accept, what I call, the "Power-RPers" are doing would be like doing a three legged race but the third leg is a rocket engine, and you're a 80 year old with brittle bones. 2: It wont stop the problems. Face it, we're unorganized collection of people that just do RP for a hobby. This is about as cohesive as it gets for that. We have 70-80 or so people on the map compared to about 190-220 countries in the real world (depending on who you ask, and what war is on). We don't have a population large enough to start excluding people that do only slightly different RP actions. Now if Martians (not Martens) invade their nation, yeah that's non-canon.... Edited January 18, 2010 by Tahsir Re Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botha Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 1: There are people that don't roleplay as much as others.2: It wont stop the problems. A nice summation there. We will always have problems crop up regardless how many rules are devised. Let's face it, in CNRP some people focus heavily on the CN aspect of it whilst others focus heavily on the RP aspect. A lot of these rules I see floated around unfortunately remove a lot of the CN from CNRP - which I personally think is wrong but hey I'm in the minority, so be it. However don't exclude those of us chosing to play legit Botha mode (not Junio Mode) because we are trying to accent the CN in CNRP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime minister Johns Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) I disagree with the activity requirement, there are different play styles and some are less active than others. But they all are perfectly valid play styles. Edited January 18, 2010 by Prime minister Johns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 The question of wars and the sort of role playing encompassed by the OP option is very different. When some nation declares unplanned war on you for some very weighty reason like "LULZ" you have the option to counter the attack through your own defenses or asking for and getting other nations to support you, in short these are man made alternatives to man made crises.However the OP conceptualizes a RPer being able to create natural catastrophies, against which there are no man made defenses. Nobody should have the right to RP the Wrath of God!! Just imagine what would happen!! Someone gets mad and BOOOM earthquake, Tsunami etc etc. Such widespread natural disasters are better left to the discretion of the RPers involved. In the Dragonisian earthquake, mael RPd an earthquake in his nation, I RPed limited effects in my nation, and Kaiser melech rped some effects in his nation. It was a cooperative gesture, and not forced. If it was forced it would not have had the synergy that was obtained in that thread. The issue is not just forced role play, it is also that not all CNRPers are as sane and wise as you may wish them to be, and I dont want the fate of my RP nation to be irrevocably held hostage to stupid people who dont have the patience and creativity to write out any RPs and are only interested in random destruction of others' RPs. If you want to RP a global catastrophe, talk to the people involved, ask them whether they would want to participate in such a thing, else create a local catastrophe for yourself and hope and pray that your neighbors join in and make it a global one as a ripple effect. I find that I must disagree with you there. Wars may be man made but they can be just as bad and just as damaging to a nation as a natural disaster and not all wars can be countered. A small nation invaded by a bigger nation with superior tech and numbers will lose almost all the time and not everyone has allies to call on, I myself currently have no IC allies currently because I doubt anyone would want to ally with me IC seeing how small my nation is. Also saying there is no defenses against natural disasters is wrong. Many places have things such as built up banks along rivers to prevent flooding and buildings with solid foundations stand a better chance of staying up in an earthquake. No if someone RP'd a global catastrophe I could agree with not going along with it as the sheer damage from such a thing could ruin many RP's and nations but if some one RP's a earthquake in their nation then I see no reason why you can avoid it, I mean as I have said if you can avoid a natural disaster then I can't see why you can't avoid a war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefano Palmieri Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 Voted No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silhouette Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I null voted because I think what we need is a nice middle ground, based on mutual respect and common sense. If you want to RP a severe natural disaster, send an PM to all the other nations it may affect, informing them, asking for their stance and opinion and so forth. And if you plan on attacking someone, send them a polite notice, or start the war with an OOC explaining why, giving them time to react. DOing this publicly would also reduce the opportunities for metagaming, as it would be blatantly obvious if player A posted an ooc message, and player B immediately stated that they are reinforcing their border with player A, etc. I'm sure tweaks would be required, but our goal here should be to make this game as enjoyable as possible for everyone involved, which in some cases will require a bit of compassion from the person doing the steamrolling... go, discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I find that I must disagree with you there. Wars may be man made but they can be just as bad and just as damaging to a nation as a natural disaster and not all wars can be countered. A small nation invaded by a bigger nation with superior tech and numbers will lose almost all the time and not everyone has allies to call on, I myself currently have no IC allies currently because I doubt anyone would want to ally with me IC seeing how small my nation is.Also saying there is no defenses against natural disasters is wrong. Many places have things such as built up banks along rivers to prevent flooding and buildings with solid foundations stand a better chance of staying up in an earthquake. No if someone RP'd a global catastrophe I could agree with not going along with it as the sheer damage from such a thing could ruin many RP's and nations but if some one RP's a earthquake in their nation then I see no reason why you can avoid it, I mean as I have said if you can avoid a natural disaster then I can't see why you can't avoid a war. I am not saying wars are not damaging, but a war can always be deterred by diplomacy and show of force. Yes, you are a small nation, but that does not mean you would not receive help if you are under threat of being curb stomped! There is no avoiding the effects of real natural disasters, no matter how prepared we are. Wars we can prepare for, natural disasters we cant. There is no predicting them, they are acts of nature. CNRP is about artificial events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhodesia Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I voted no simply because some people will never be made to understand or care how their actions affect others within this game which will only lead to those who do not want to get involved in countless wars to suffer the consequences of the unrealistically and overly trigger happy world that this game has evolved into. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 I'm in the middle. While I don't think people should be able to not recognize wars because they think it's unfair, I also don't think that we should have to RP the real-ish effects of our irresponsible use of nukes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Minister Posted January 18, 2010 Report Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) In an ideal world, where people are 100% responsible for their posts, ie: no "lol going to reroll, war?" and everyone is on even footing, I would vote yes. However, we are far from from paradise on these forums. Furthermore, this breaks anything and everything that has to do with my strict "Do not force others to RP" rule. Hell no. There is no NEED to define CNRP. History shows us that if anyone dares to 'want a shell' they shall be immediately feathered and tarred by this 'community' that is in danger of falling apart if people vote no "Leav[ing] a huge division in CNRP and add[ing] to more fighting and bickering between people about what should and what should not exist, their name becoming a synonym with negativity that is to be inferred unto similar acting people in the future. It is clear that we currently have an unofficial defense mechanism in place to address the Reasons Against for the No arguement. The idea that we should split CNRP into yes and no parties is equally bad. Period. It is the above reaction to the 'Sheller' put to the extreme. The current status quo mixed with a little consideration for others is what we need. Edited January 19, 2010 by Executive Minister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacharth Posted January 19, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 19, 2010 I have updated the OP. Poll is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted January 19, 2010 Report Share Posted January 19, 2010 I have updated the OP. Poll is over. Hmm... Ok. At least we got a good variety of opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.