The rp thread "last full measure of devotion" is something a bit different in rp terms. We've developed a methodology to conduct rp battles, resolutions, and specific rp events that are not physically connected to the game. We've done this, in conjunction with approval from RP-mods, by giving approval for myself to violate several rp rules for the sake of storytelling. Some measure of god-modding will be apparent and several other things too. However, all characters have consented, or else they can't be part of the storyline.

http://knights-honor.com/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,181/func,view/catid,5/id,83668/#83668


If anyone has any questions about our methodology or just general questions about the storyline, that's what this thread is for. Cheers.

If it's not related to the game events, but pure phantasy, why not move it in "Myths and Legends" where belongs?

Yes I tend to agree - this has got a great potential to confuse people about the RP rules, for example.

Well, seeing as how its already been approved and its not fantasy. It's RP... I see no need to do this or even seriously contemplate it.

If others would prefer to restrict themselves to rp of the quality of "you're an idiiot" "no you are" that is their personal issues and in no way restricts everyone else from elevating the level of storytelling and the exploration of characters within the KH "world"... regardless of if the armies are real or RP constructs. Additionally the primary issue, god-modding, is only a violation if the character in question has not agreed to have you speak for them. In this case, the only difference is the scale which involves six characters.

The rp rules were not put into place to restrict creative storytelling within the world, but to prevent abuses between characters (primarily) no such abuse is taking place here.

The player of Seighin Cumhaill takes the approach of attaching the message "Posted with Permission of Player of X" at the top of any message violating that Player's privilege.

So you could place such a message (naming the players assenting to the violation) at the top.

I don't agree with the part of Greg's comment regarding phantasy (or fantasy, even); that's not the issue here.

But I do agree with what I expect is his objection regarding the mods "approval" of a private arrangement, which tends to provide a benefit to "insiders" that is not easily accessible to outsiders. (Greg is cast as L’Étranger, of course).

So I would like to see a statement from the Mods to the following effect:

QUOTE:
1. Certain of the RP rules can be modified by agreement of all players whose characters (PC and NPC) are named in an RP post.
2. Modification of the rules can be arranged by negotiation with the mod team, on a per-thread basis.
3. Where a rule modification has been agreed, posts must state the modification and list the players who have agreed to it at the top . This is the only OOC statement permitted in an RP post.
4. Fraudulently claiming agreement to a rule modification is a serious offense and players responsible will be banned.

I will take this to the RP-mods Forum asap. We'll come back with a statement, as requested.

For god's sake it's role-play, not writing a novel. How about Alar posting also Abdul Hakam reports "just by agreement between players"?
You should convince the other players to join you in RP.

Charles Hart wrote:

QUOTE:
If others would prefer to restrict themselves to rp of the quality of "you’re an idiiot" "no you are" that is their personal issues and in no way restricts everyone else from elevating the level of storytelling and the exploration of characters swithin the KH "world"... regardless of if the armies are real or RP construct.

I would prefer a RP of quality based on the events in the game, like Following the Dream and the rest of Elyn Asta Maleusdottir RP posts. I recommend it as model for those who don't understand what RP stand for.

Of course I would enjoy stories "within the KH "world"... regardless of if the armies are real or RP construct" in Myth and Legends where belongs, despite the constant attacks on Gregory char.

Charles Hart wrote:

QUOTE:
We've done this, in conjunction with approval from RP-mods, by giving approval for myself to violate several rp rules for the sake of storytelling.

This is a serious issue already.
We would like to hear a statement of the RP-mod or RP-team about giving approval to violate several RP rules and in what basis they approve the rules they suppose to enforce to be breached.
If such approval doesn't exist, the player Charles Hart should be suspended.

It has been agreed that there will be a statement from the mods about this.

I would hope that, in addition to addressing the points I raised, the mods will also address Greg's point about connection to the KH reality.

As far as I'm concerned, this change should only be about expediting conversations involving more than one player, in order to avoid the need for a series of short posts of the form X said blah, Y said blak, X said blah. Ideally their would be a mechanism where by a group of players could jointly post such a conversation, but there isn't such a mechanism, so this is a fallback where one of those players is given the authority (I suggest for a given thread only) to post on behalf of the others.

Since (I suggest) it should be only about expediting conversations that would be entirely valid (albeit cumbersome) if presented as a series of short posts from those involved, there need not be (and should not be) any relaxation of the content rules. For example:
- writing about characters of a player not in the "posting group" is not permitted, so Charles can't post things with James saying something (unless Greg agrees)
- writing things that contradict engine results should not be permitted (so no "fantasy"

Unfortunately, and I realize this was the fervent hope of one of the posters in this thread, the issue *has* been discussed with several RP-mods, and I do have the approval... and in addition Denis de Fecamp in particular has the sent notifications of all people in the storyline for me to use their NPCs.

Additionally it has been previously ruled that an NPC of another character cannot be used "..without that players consent.." Ergo... once consent is given, you can in fact do so. There have been other instances of people putting words in others mouths etc etc and so forth.

Lastly; I get that you don't understand what rp is, that isn't the issue here and I accept it. However, bringing additional dynamic stories to the game is of benefit to everyone. If this requires "permission" to do so, that is what I did set up previous to even beginning said storyline. This is an RP event as the description says... '...... stories about the life of knights.." Which is why it is an rp thread about their lives.... not about bare bones descriptions of things that have happened in the engine or insult trading.

And as a postscript.. if you believe three word document pages to be a *novel*... I really think you should read more, mate. That's not cool.

@Smelgar. You two points are in fact already hard wired into things. There's no reason in the storyline to mention anyone except possibly in passing, or a spouse etc etc and so forth. We're not going to kidnap James and ride him naked through the streets of Barcelona on a donkey.. (funny as that would be). It would clearly be an abuse of a character who had not consented to being part of the storyline. No magical fairy creatures will come... God will not open the heavens and scoop someone up...

There is no "myths and legends" to this storyline at all, and as such talk about moving there is pretty much baseless. I could see an argument of moving it to Nations. But these are events that are occurring in the rp history of Aragon and will be referenced in the future by these characters the same as any rp. They will become a vital part of the history and experience of their characters within the game. The RP, however, is the logical place for this to be.

Charles Hart wrote:

QUOTE:


. We're not going to kidnap James and ride him naked through the streets of Barcelona on a donkey.. (funny as that would be). It would clearly be an abuse of a character who had not consented to being part of the storyline.

However, were he a part of the storyline, he could give permission for me to write up the description of said event if he desired, or did not want to do so himself.