Discovery Gaming Community
Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Printable Version

+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks (/showthread.php?tid=146460)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Zelot - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:22 PM)Engel Wrote:
(12-22-2016, 05:15 PM)Zelot Wrote:
(12-22-2016, 05:09 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: See, that's not that easy, Zelot.

While you make an example of a Trading Faction and a Police faction - which are usually without a strong connection, the National Council of Malta and the Oracles of Malta have a strong connection. The NC is the political institution, the Oracles a religious institution, and in this case Mercier/Mercante is leading the NC's CID while being a member of the religious institution of the Oracles of Malta. That's actually a reasonable connection. However, what you suggest is also possible, as nothing prevents you from playing a lobby-ing corrupted Police officer. However, do that with RP background.

Why not do it how ever I want? There is no rule against it. And if these two factions are so connected that there is no difference between them, just one is political and one is religious, why do they have different tech? Here is a better example for you if you don't like the trading faction example. I could have my AFA join the Sairs, they are allied. That way I could get a Battleship for the AFA right? Even though there is a restriction on the AFA getting BS's, I can just get around this by joining a second, or third, or fourth faction with my character.

I have no problems with FA giving the information to Sairs. Example that you have put before with person being in corp and police at the same time is just stupid. I mean factions are transfering the info between each other all the time.

We aren't talking about one faction giving info to another, we are taking about one chat being in both factions so as to make the act of sharing unessessary and using the tech of one of the factions to benefit the other. It's pretty much the textbook definition of metagaming.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Laura C. - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:12 PM)Engel Wrote: @Laura C.
In the context this it was given it's rather allowing players to fly untagged ships with the official faction ID despite some internal rules set by the faction leadership .

(03-18-2016, 06:44 PM)Arioch Wrote: Many faction leaders will impose their own internal rules that if you're in the faction, you need to carry the tag, but this is not server rules and thus you won't be sanctioned for it.

Also forcing official factions to use their ID instead of the indie one. I'd take a look here, instead:

Quote:Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
Yes, it is mainly clarification that players are allowed to fly official faction´s ships untagged. However in the same time, it also clearly states that member of official faction is obliged to have equipped his faction´s ID all the time.

(03-18-2016, 06:44 PM)Arioch Wrote: BUT, you are required to have the Official Player Faction ID equipped if you are in that official faction.


RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Divine - 12-22-2016

Quote:Faction Membership

First of all: player is owner of the account. Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).

Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
To be found here: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1746

That's the end of that discussion. It's violating the rules. Period.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Engel - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:28 PM)Laura C. Wrote: Yes, it is mainly clarification that players are allowed to fly official faction´s ships untagged. However in the same time, it also clearly states that member of official faction is obliged to have equipped his faction´s ID all the time.

(03-18-2016, 06:44 PM)Arioch Wrote: BUT, you are required to have the Official Player Faction ID equipped if you are in that official faction.

By this wording if I'm in RFP I need to have all of my ships RFP ID'ed.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Engel - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:32 PM)Divine Wrote:
Quote:Faction Membership

First of all: player is owner of the account. Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).

Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
To be found here: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1746

That's the end of that discussion. It's violating the rules. Period.

You do realize that in this context character is a ship right? It means I can't have a ship DSE)name[101st] or tagged ship with the ID of other faction. In this case it's impossible to have NC-Oracle| ship.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Sombs - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:32 PM)Divine Wrote:
Quote:Faction Membership

First of all: player is owner of the account. Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).

Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
To be found here: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1746

That's the end of that discussion. It's violating the rules. Period.

Nope, that's not about inRP characters but the characters of the account. Otherwise, a roleplay character couldn't have a private ship that is just freelancer/zoner while he also has official ships flying for the faction the character is part of. Don't mix that up. Same term, different meanings.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Backo - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:35 PM)Engel Wrote:
(12-22-2016, 05:32 PM)Divine Wrote:
Quote:Faction Membership

First of all: player is owner of the account. Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).

Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
To be found here: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=1746

That's the end of that discussion. It's violating the rules. Period.

You do realize that in this context character is a ship right? It means I can't have a ship DSE)name[101st] or tagged ship with the ID of other faction.

And PoBs are also in a context players, yeah...[/sarcasm]

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Laura C. - 12-22-2016

(12-22-2016, 05:33 PM)Engel Wrote:
(12-22-2016, 05:28 PM)Laura C. Wrote: Yes, it is mainly clarification that players are allowed to fly official faction´s ships untagged. However in the same time, it also clearly states that member of official faction is obliged to have equipped his faction´s ID all the time.

(03-18-2016, 06:44 PM)Arioch Wrote: BUT, you are required to have the Official Player Faction ID equipped if you are in that official faction.

By this wording if I'm in RFP I need to have all of my ships RFP ID'ed.
Technically by strict wording yes, but it´s obvious that it was not meant this way. Basically when you log ship for purpose of playing RFP/BDM/whatever other faction´s character, it needs to be equipped with that faction´s ID.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Engel - 12-22-2016

@Laura C.
Once again, from an actual context it's saying that I can fly untagged ship with the official ID and it will not break the rules. Also mentionioning possible internal faction rules in that case. You are taking a part of text out of context which is a wrong way to work with with facts. I've made my previous example to show how badly it can actually work out.

RE: Enforcement of Roleplay Consequences(TM) and cloaks - Sombs - 12-22-2016

You're tryharding to fight common sense, currently. What prevents you from being both mailman and soldier at the same time? Nothing. What prevents you from having a foot in a religious institution while being working for an intelligence service? Nothing. If you can justify it inRP - that is what is given - your inRP character can be in two factions. And there is nothing wrong with that, as no matter what ship you are using, you have to deal with the restrictions the ID you are currently using comes with. It's not only a clever thing, but also a legal thing.

Right now, I see popping up one quote after another coming from threads that are about completely other things. Could we maybe stop tryharding this by using something that someone said somewhen else in a different context?

All I see here is a very desperate try to revert that justified FR5 rather than dealing with that FR5 inRP.