Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Miles_Umbrae]

How do you guys feel about the possibility of judges? I find it weird that the captain of the guard merely decides who gets hammered. There should be courts and also the judge might overrule mandates if necessary...

Courts and judges is assuming one unified culture of ethics.
There could also be a magistrate and a legal representative for each party in the case.
Or the captain of the guard could present the case before the king/lord/duke/high priest/bishop/clerk or whatever other person of authority of judgement would be applicable to that specific system.
The captain of the peace could assemble a tribunal of citizens and present the case before them.

There are a multitude of options, many of them hinging on the ethics, morality, superstition, and tradition that each society is built upon.

[Detoxicated]

But back to an increasing issue I see, why is it that the same user(s) constantly derail threads via cherrypicked arguments and ignoring one another's sources? This is getting crazy, I keep seeing it happen again and again and again, and it's strangling relevant discussion in the crib

It became derailed when one user kept insisting that portrayals of violence, such as slavery or torture, should not be in the game as that is(according to said user) the cause of violent individuals.
Multiple attempts have been made to get the conversation back on topic, but said user kept on bringing up the off-topic subject in their walls of text.
It has gotten to the point that ignoring said user is no longer an option.

But yet you insist on not dropping the argument yourself...

Anyhow your suggestion about magistrates etc seems pretty indepth and I support it. Especially that tribunal you mentioned seems very interesting in terms of gameplay.
I feel as a fortress you should be able to oversee the tribunal but not influence it, but as an adventurer you should be able to influence tribuns or if you are the convict well get punished by the tribunal.

[GoblinCookie]

It became derailed when one user kept insisting that portrayals of violence, such as slavery or torture, should not be in the game as that is(according to said user) the cause of violent individuals.
Multiple attempts have been made to get the conversation back on topic, but said user kept on bringing up the off-topic subject in their walls of text.
It has gotten to the point that ignoring said user is no longer an option.

I actually tried to end the discussion myself, but it kept coming back.  The problem is that with governments, it really *is* the main issue; everything else is just talking about mechanics.  How far should we go down the road of representing structurally oppressive systems in the game.  That issue has far greater significance if video games condition their player's minds to replicate what they have been doing in-game than it does if it doesn't. 

If that is the case then any game that casts the player as the oppressor become in effect propaganda for oppression. 

You provided *one* study. That's what we were saying.

I provided two documents referencing several studies.  Someone else provided two more studies on top of that if I recall. 

[KittyTac]

It became derailed when one user kept insisting that portrayals of violence, such as slavery or torture, should not be in the game as that is(according to said user) the cause of violent individuals.
Multiple attempts have been made to get the conversation back on topic, but said user kept on bringing up the off-topic subject in their walls of text.
It has gotten to the point that ignoring said user is no longer an option.

I actually tried to end the discussion myself, but it kept coming back.  The problem is that with governments, it really *is* the main issue; everything else is just talking about mechanics.  How far should we go down the road of representing structurally oppressive systems in the game.  That issue has far greater significance if video games condition their player's minds to replicate what they have been doing in-game than it does if it doesn't. 

If that is the case then any game that casts the player as the oppressor become in effect propaganda for oppression. 

You provided *one* study. That's what we were saying.

I provided two documents referencing several studies.  Someone else provided two more studies on top of that if I recall.

I'll ask a FOTF question before it is too late.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

A potentially better metacomment: this is not the place to argue about whether a particular suggestion would be beneficial to humanity. I would contact Toady directly for that. Convincing the entire suggestion board is harder and much less likely to have an effect even if you succeed.

This is true regardless of the truth about the societal effects of video games. This is serving to halt the derail.

[thompson]

I actually tried to end the discussion myself, but it kept coming back.

For anyone who wasn't aware, the way to end a pointless internet debate is to stop participating in it. We're not stupid, we don't judge the winner by whom pots last.

[KittyTac]

I actually tried to end the discussion myself, but it kept coming back.

For anyone who wasn't aware, the way to end a pointless internet debate is to stop participating in it. We're not stupid, we don't judge the winner by whom pots last.

GC has even stated that backing out of arguments is "not his style". That's a bit hypocritical, don't you think?

[Detoxicated]

Throughout the thread you kept on hitting in the bee hive... And still won't drop it.

[Rowanas]

And back to our regularly scheduled programme -

I think that, regardless of how it works, the position of judge is necessary. Whether they are Judge Dredd or just handing down sentences after conviction by a jury of peers, there's always someone making a decision, and Legal Decision Maker is a bit wordy.

[GenericUser]

And back to our regularly scheduled programme -

I think that, regardless of how it works, the position of judge is necessary. Whether they are Judge Dredd or just handing down sentences after conviction by a jury of peers, there's always someone making a decision, and Legal Decision Maker is a bit wordy.

Good idea, and the position can also hold some clout, that would make it be a target for plots.

[KittyTac]

As stated in the FOTF, Toady doesn't really care about playing oppressive governments, as long as it's not hardcoded racism or hardcoded sexism. I win.

And back to our regularly scheduled programme -

I think that, regardless of how it works, the position of judge is necessary. Whether they are Judge Dredd or just handing down sentences after conviction by a jury of peers, there's always someone making a decision, and Legal Decision Maker is a bit wordy.

Good idea, and the position can also hold some clout, that would make it be a target for plots.

+1.

[Detoxicated]

Technically you don't since your discussion's subject was about the possibilities of media influence on the player not if it was actually going to matter for dwarf fortress.

So we all agree on having a judge type position that is nice. So how could it work in game?

[ZM5]

I'd personally go with the squads made by the captain of the guard be responsible for collecting evidence and hearing testimonies, which gets relayed to the judge afterwards - would give them more of a use.

Tbh this kinda opens an entire can of worms (or can of mechanics in this case) to make it more engaging and better for stories - for one, if it is a fortress guard who's the guilty party they could attempt to either twist the testimony to drive suspicion away from them or dispose of evidence - which of course would require more mechanics in place to have citizens report seeing them get rid of the evidence, as well as resolving stuff thats contradictory (i.e testimony from one witness says Urist McSahwit was seen near the crime scene on the afternoon of the 5th of granite, shortly before Urist McCinderblock's dead body was discovered; but testimony from another witness says Urist McSahwit was seen sparring at the same time in the barracks, which are far away from the crime scene, which would take suspicion away from Urist McSahwit; ergo more investigation is required to resolve this contradiction) - and then this also needs stuff in place to allow criminals to muck up disposing of evidence based on some skill checks and attributes, i.e forgetting or not noticing a bloodstain on an article of their clothing if the culprit murders someone in a bloody manner, etc. etc.

This isn't even accounting for differences between how dwarves, humans and the like would handle it - and then you'd have further splits down the line on local levels as was previously brought up (small backwater village vs. large trade hub town) - so I'd wager that an improved judicial system would most likely have enough content to make for an update arc of its own.

[Detoxicated]

True what you say. IMO i you need a working judicial system to make up a government so I support what you posted wholeheartedly

[GoblinCookie]

For anyone who wasn't aware, the way to end a pointless internet debate is to stop participating in it. We're not stupid, we don't judge the winner by whom pots last.

If the thread insists on being about the topic I have decided that I want to terminate discussion about, stopping participating in the topic is in effect being exiled from the thread.  I agreed and others decided to end the discussion, but other folks decided to continue it anyway.  I have no interest in 'my side' losing the argument decisively simply because I have a policy of non-commenting, resulting in less competent debaters taking up my own cause and driving it into the ground and as the thread continues to remain off-topic anyway this was to no gain to anyone except the opposition.  Of course the whole "you GC are uniquely derailing the thread" BS is seldom anything but an opposition ploy to take me off the field anyway. 

As stated in the FOTF, Toady doesn't really care about playing oppressive governments, as long as it's not hardcoded racism or hardcoded sexism. I win.
+1.

KittyTac can win if it makes him feel better.  Onto what was actually said.

There are particular bits of oppression I have no interest in adding (systematized sexual violence, many of the various human genocides, certain forms of discrimination as previously discussed, etc), and other bits are already in there, as observed in the referenced posts.  So you'd have to be more specific, though I don't want to drag what's apparently a suggestions forum beef into this thread.

A suggestions forum beef?  It seems that they know what you are up to KittyTac.  In any case, you totally missed nuances of my point anyway.  I was never arguing against adding oppressive governments as a fact of the game world, I was against us being able to play as such governments, or high-ranking characters in such governments.  I was also not against us having plenty of mechanics to allow us to choose to oppress our beings if we will. 

What I was against was the playability of roles and governments when oppression is 'pre-established', that is it is a fact of your society that you realistically should not be able to hand-wave away simply by your divine Armokian will.  It would be fine in my opinion to have a slaver society in the game, but it would not be fine to actually play as either a slaver or anyone in the government of such a society. 

My position was always that we should be barred from playing as those directly implicated in implementing oppressive systems external to themselves, never that the game should be utopian everywhere (that is pretty close to what exists).  We need some kind of moral dimension in the game or else all external conflict becomes a cosmetic argument as to which utopia's flag will fly over which place and which dull technocrat should be in charge of implementing an identically perfect policy. 

Technically you don't since your discussion's subject was about the possibilities of media influence on the player not if it was actually going to matter for dwarf fortress.

So we all agree on having a judge type position that is nice. So how could it work in game?

The main issues with a judge is who appoints the judge and how independent is the judge. 

The options for the first question would be decided between the central government, the local government and election by the population at the appropriate level at which the judge operates (central or local). 

The options for the latter are basically about whether the decisions of the judge can be overridden by another authority at all and what authority gets to override which judges.  Some things are obviously out (we can't have a local government official overriding a central government judge) but there should be some malus for judge's being overridden by other official, especially for folks that believe in [LAW], proportionate to how serious the crime is and how clear the guilt or innocence of the party benefiting is.