The Law

... sit down, kick back and relax, and talk about anything that doesn't belong on one of the other forums.
Starvald
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2020 3:58 am

Re: The Law

Post by Starvald » Sun Feb 27, 2022 10:07 pm

magus wrote:
Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:56 pm
Starvald wrote:
Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:38 pm
magus wrote:
Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:35 pm
The point is that we have a ridiculous amount of laws that vary from city to city, that are near impossible to actually find, and that depending on who breaks them or who gets targetted we either ignore those laws completely and do whatever we want, or we we scramble through those laws letter by letter to find any excuse to justify us or give a loophole.

Its perfectly fine to mess over an MC, because hes an MC, even though we dont actually know hes an MC or not until after it all happens. If you break a law when hunting an MC, then its ok nobodys gonna punish you for it because we dont like who you are going after. But if its someone you like who gets affected then the laws must be followed and theres nothing we can do.
So in essence, favouritism?
In essence yes, though so deeply embedded that look at the number of people that immediately jumped to the good guys defense. Look at how easy it is to ignore everything that other people were doing wrong. Im not saying that I shouldnt be warranted, I'm saying that the way I got there, and the way all other rules whatsoever were thrown out the window to get there. Aloisa's actions were justified retroactively by the fact that it turned out I was an MC.

But what if it was flipped, and I had accused your alt of being an MC with a doctored log. Then you were instantly warranted in less than 20 mins, and murdered over it the very next time you played before you got it cleared up. At that point with Aloisa reacting the exact same way are her actions still justified? was it then ok that the other Aes Sedai attacked you in EF and chased you to BE and murdered you in front of the king?
Im not sure, I wouldnt out myself immediately and ruin any chance of resolving the situation, you in essence confirmed Suerns log (if there is one i havent looked into it) which makes it a pretty steep slope to argue doctoring from.

Also, given you have an MC warrant i doubt the other sedai bothered to check forums before going to kill you. I know i dont do that for every warranted character ive interacted with. Also by that point you had outed yourself to the world as a male channeler so im not sure any king is rpishly going to be unhappy to watch you burn to a crisp or be gutted by an axe.

Vannor
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2021 10:05 pm

Re: The Law

Post by Vannor » Sun Feb 27, 2022 10:14 pm

People have varying degrees with how invested into RP they are. Logs are a necessary evil for proving things that occur ICly and there probably is an argument that logs shouldn't be acceptable as gospel truth since it's nonsensical in the world setting of WoT that they can be produced as evidence of something. But from a gameplay POV, they are necessary to streamline IC interactions.

Dragonsworn are/were targeted for a variety of reasons. Haven for MCs, which are meant to be hunted by the entire wholist if known is one of them, as the 'good guy MCs' makes for weird scenarios particularly in a PK context. DS, anecdotally, hates it when Dsworn MCs turn up in group PK. But realistically its no different than if that player was playing on their accepted or something.

Personally I think the bigger problem occurs when people invest heavily into one chr/side and then blend their IC standpoint with their OOC one. Jafras hilarious thread on his prac trainer which was then run into the ground by the Tower folk grabbing their torch and pitchforks is a sad example of that, imo.

As to your case in particular here though.

Yeah arguably Aloisa should've gathered further information beyond the log/report of a Tower wanted person, since logs can be doctored. But there's no real breach of RP of a Red Ajah dealing with a 'common criminal' to warrant a character that is the literal entire focus of their clan. Especially when backed up with compelling evidence in the form of a log. In my view anyway. I'm not sure what rule was thrown out.

Your real mistake was weaving on Suern. If you wanted to stay hidden, and you don't kill them to protect yourself via 'dead men tell no tales' then you gotta expect your secret is out at that point.

Overall I just don't know what the expectation was for players of Dsworn MCs. If you weave, you'll get outed, then you'll be warranted, and then you'll be hunted. Some persons obviously would be willing to put that aside, but many wouldn't, not least of all the Red Ajah whose whole clan identity is to hunt MCs.

As to your comments about it depends on the person who sends the log in, yeah it does, and pretending it doesn't is a little bit of denial. Nature of the beast.

Feneon
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 5:02 pm

Re: The Law

Post by Feneon » Sun Feb 27, 2022 11:17 pm

From your vantage point, Magus, it's easy to see why you would feel this way and maybe the real culprit is not that there is active enforcement to protect specific players, but that there is no active enforcement to keep RP in line with the clan's intentions. While Aloisa may be the Red Ajah that did this, it should have been any of them.

While we cannot enforce that all people report instances of male channeling to the Red Ajah, it likely would make sense that immortals act as the 'eyes and ears' more regularly when witnessing out-of-character actions that do not align with character enforced RP live and in-game. There is a limited amount of immortals online and off-line currently and a lot of us spend our focus and energy on creating content, but maybe it would be better to also help to sure up the atmosphere by enforcing RP. The problem is that we don't enjoy punishing players for breaking RP.
This may have led to only egregious acts of out of character or in character violations being punished and punished heavily and us not enjoying that experience.

We can in the future work harder to make sure players align with their designated clan roleplay by immersing into the roleplay between players with the eyes and ears concept of Immortals.


Ultimately, if anyone feels that they have been warranted unjustly, and have followed the protocols outlined in the rules to right the injustice and made no headway then you can submit an appeal to the Immortals. The reason that we would like clans to deal with their warrants before immortals get involved is to give the players an opportunity to roleplay out scenarios. We do not like to be seen as the first line of contact for injustice related to warrants, but we are here and have firm policies on what is and is not justified. Your scenario plays out differently if you do not admit to being a male channeler, maybe, but you at least have room to roleplay an interesting scenario. We are now in Player's Lounge talking meta about warrants related to a male channeler because you believe it is indicative of a culture.

In this case, if you had not been an MC rules would have been broken. You admitted to being a male channeler. No rules were broken.

Locked