The whole TB-Governour-Thingie

[Siltaris]

Do you not realize you were using OOC in game to a very high extent?

Basically, I have used a char I have introduced before in several former forum postings, when Siltaris was alive: Her Adjutant.
It is nothing but logic that he is well informed what the Governor was doing.
True is that the char has not been created before and thus not played by myself before. So, yes, I used my ooc-knowledge for him to make that testament happen. Nevertheless, it is logic that this char knows the things he wrote on the board.

Is such behaviour forbidden? I do not know for sure, but I doubt that it is against the rules of this game.
In particular when you start see what the Adjutant tried to influence:

- He published a testament. Is this soley fact ooc-info?
- He backed this testament with letters he has found in the belongings of Siltaris. Well, this has more to do with ooc, but it still is reasonable.
- This testament was nothing but an offer. Jerimedes hardly intervened into the whole war or any resistance. It was just a paper which gave the new government a simple choice: accept or do no accept.

Let us asume there would have been no testament at all. What would have happened?
The new government claimed ooc for new keys to the public buildings. Perhaps the staff would hand them the keys to public buildings. Though, the Seahorse never was a public building. The staff knew that. So, you never would have the soley opportunity to become (illegal) owner of the Seahorse. You would never had the chance to discuss if the testament is righteous.
Besides, I hardly have ever seen such deep ig discussion, backed with postings from the town board about the question if the Seahorse would be property of TB or not. First, keep in mind that this discussion was just possible because of the testament. Second, keep in mind that the information some people have used were just there because they were written down on the town board.

In my opinion, you should start to see the Testament as an opportunity given to you for good Roleplay. If you are annoyed, since you did not use this chance to become owner of the Seahorse... well, do not blame me for that, please.

You have no right to challenge a player's decisions in game with OOC in any way.

I am not really sure what you are adressing with this statement. Is it the cost-bill for the Seahorse? Is it the fact that there was an adjutant played by me who published the testament?
Again, in fact with Jerimedes and the testament I just gave you the opportunity to decide what should happen to the Seahorse and the belongings.

Yes, in 5 hours you lost 9 months of planning or whatever. These things have happened to many people. All of them had story lines and things they wanted to get done as well.

You have missed the point. What I tried to explain was that people should think about the consequences of their ig actions. With your idea of making some war you destroyed a well working government, you initiated a resistance, you clouded people, you made your characters as criminals, short: you forced people to REACT to YOUR roleplay, which had high impact on the whole ig situation.

Now, there is a little parchment called testament of Siltaris, which accepts your roleplay and gives you a chance to keep on doing your roleplay. And now you are upset because I have followed your storyline? Sorry, this is hard to understand for me.


If it was just war what you seeked, then you could have that much easier and much better played.
If you wanted to take over town, you seem to have failed, since you seem not to be able to cope with a single testament which asks you to either say: "accept" or "refuse".

So, what I was talking about was, that it is not about 9 months of work I have put into that job as governor. I already have given that up with Siltaris' death. It was just about the last 4 or 5 weeks I have planned to build a new town gate. I would like to see that build up. It was up to you to say: no, we do not want that.


Guys, you should start to think over the impacts of your ig actions. And you should accept other players moves in the storyline you have initiated. Play together.
Peace and harmony, folks.

[AlexRose]

LMFAO

An internal struggle wtf?

No, we just didn't want to keep it; the traders weren't selling so there was no town taxes, and apart from the money there's nothing going for TB.

[Siltaris]

No, we just didn't want to keep it; the traders weren't selling so there was no town taxes, and apart from the money there's nothing going for TB.

So it was all about money?

[Mr. Cromwell]

Not for me.

Actually, I really wanted to change things in the town.
But now it seems that things will only get worse OOCly. I foresee that the tax-income of the bane will be used exclusively for the benefit of some other (SB/Zzyathis) town.. and that was *not* what I had in mind when I supported the taxes-for-towns scheme.

But honestly, PO Siltaris, I just have the feeling that the main intention of the testament was to 'give challenge' (=basically to screw the new administration in the worst possible way). Why else would there have been then "if Gryphius refuses the Grey Rose AND Silverbrand will get the seahorse" - part? As far as I have understood, the relationship with the Dwarves and Siltaris was not exactly a huggy-huggy one. You are promising a tangible benefit for random town leaders in the event one refuses, and hence it will be in their best interest to see the will to be fulfilled. With the merchants being closed, the streets being packed with rebels and mummies and whatever, that was too much of a 'challenge' in my opinion. It's not really as simple as you make it out to be.

I don't really think that Silverbrand would have been promised a thing, should there have been, for instance, an alliance between Silas and the dwarves. So it was basically a tailor-made sitiuation of digging the ground from under the new government's feet. Accept the sitiuation and lose yet another piece of land for some X-foreigner or refuse and give the X-foreigners a clear initiative to join the already large forces who oppose you. Which I find pretty.. lousy options.

If a player uses multiple characters he/she has to separate them. Both characters have their own mind and knowledge. What is known to one character is most likely unknown to other characters. It is not allowed to exchange items between the characters, nor middlemen. Usage of more than one character at the same time is forbidden.

You can disagree, of course.. but I do find this to be in violation of the spirit of the rule. Back in the day, I know that people were warned by gamemasters for basically playing a main character and having a second character to support the political stance of the main character. If you want to finish the storyline of your character, it should never include making another character to ensure that the storyline is ended like you want it to. Posting the testament itself = Not very nice for the new government, but quite acceptable in itself. Posting all that other stuff with "Jerimedes".. I found it unfair.

If it doesn't violate the letter of the rule, I find it to be a violation of the spirit of the rule and hence the whole mess left a nasty aftertaste. Sure, there were some interesting posts in the topic, but if you had truly wanted to see some RP, you would have left the sitiuation there after the testament. You basically made it very hard to argue against your character's point of view by constantly "finding" stuff in the belongings of Siltaris which conviniently supported her "goodness" and whatever. *shrugs*

I did not like it.

[Siltaris]

PO Cromwell,

thanks fot the good answer.
I see you arguments. Perhaps it was indeed too much action of Jerimedes.
Though, in the end it did not change anythin on the opportunites the new government had. It just sharpended the consequences. It made the situation more precarious.

However, the governor and his fellowship already were an invaders, so it would not have changed much on the reputation if the invaders would have refuse the testament.

So, what Jerimedes did was to conter your attempts to find a "righteous" way to refuse the content of the testament. All I did was to back the validity of this testament. In the end, the consequence would always have been the same - accept or refuse.

I regret if you did not like that action. Though, in the end it was just a small piece in the whole affair of finfing new government structures.

The rest of the stuff: Mummies, merchants closed, rebels,....
For the mummies it was bad luck. But there always have been attacks on TB.
For the merchants it was not able to be foreseen, but it was reasonable. As far as I have noticed there was little efforts to convince merchants to reopen.
For the rebels.. it was logic that they would be there.

In the end it was clear from the beginning that invading trolls bane will be difficult task. If the testament was the straw that broke the camel's back, I am sorry for that.
Nevertheless, I still have the feeling that the invasion was not well planned.



The reason for giving the Seahorse to GR and SB:
Siltaris always had good relations to the Grandmaster Lennier as well as to the King Thorwald. The testament gives them - not the particluar nation - the Seahorse. So it fits well with the ig situation.

[Thorwald]

Nur ganz kurz am Rande , wer hat die Schlüßel zum Seahorse IG ??
Zwerg will es sich ja auch mal von innen ansehen

[Ardian]

Frag bei der Rose nach, die haben sie vielleicht

[AlexRose]

No, we just didn't want to keep it; the traders weren't selling so there was no town taxes, and apart from the money there's nothing going for TB.

So it was all about money?

Not at all; but there was no point for us to KEEP IT, as I explained ingame.

[Fooser]

Can't we just have a public insulting of William Elderberry, call him a n00b and things of the sort, then execute him and move on???

[AlexRose]

How about we invade again and next time I give it to Fooser, k?