I think that if I'm coming across as supercilious (which I had to google), then I'm fucking up. So I'll need to work on that. When (not if, no way am I going to get this right at first), you spot that happening, please PM me a quote of what I'm doing so I can cut it out. What I'm trying to do is to take the high road and not respond to you going out of your way to start a fight for fighting's sake, and I had to stop myself from making a really direct response calling you out on it. So what I replaced it with was pretty much what I told myself when I made myself stop writing that reply.
I'm not trying to start a fight for fighting's sake any more than you're being supercilious on purpose (if you genuinely aren't, which I'm willing to accept). So far the one thing I do regret is assuming you were being intentionally patronizing. In my experience, I would say that, absent an intimate personal connection (in real life), assuming another person's emotional state, such as telling people to calm down or saying someone will regret something later, is generally inappropriate. It comes off as implying, "your argument is so dumb that you must be crazy and overemotional to think that". I know that I've come close to this at least once here as well, and I'm willing to take that back too.
Also, it's silly how you claim to think I want a fight considering how many times I had to stop myself from accusing you of writing self-contradictory lies just to get a rise out of me and attempt to cause a fight.
I'm not claiming to think you want a fight. I also haven't written any self-contradictory lies. If you think anything I said was self-contradictory
or a lie, then you're not interpreting it the way I intended. I am happy to try to clarify again. I think you're mistaking me being blunt for trying to start a fight - if I think you're doing something wrong or being an asshole I'm going to tell you, but that's not because I want to fight.
and now to the meat of the matter
[...]So we've got two things to cover here, and I think the second will resolve the first. The first is the bright-line region, which I do believe exists, but I think it's smaller and less encompassing than you think it is. And the second section where I gave examples of easilly accepted variants of the points I want to argue for, I think you thought those were the only acceptable ones. They were not, not even close. They're just mild examples that I was and still am prepared to accept instantly without any argument. Other, stronger, versions also exist and are also acceptable, though I'll want to talk them through first instead of them being the auto-ins the given examples are.
I think that showing how the bright-line region as you called it is much smaller than you described, solves this.
See, this is really the core of the dispute here. You seem to think you're being reasonable and offering plenty of compromise; I don't understand how you could possibly think other players owe you a reaction you're okay with to your own choice at all. I also think you're underselling the extent of your actual bright line, because you've been talking about "don't kill your character", when nobody has even suggested that - the worst that was proposed was that Indaria be fired, not killed, which isn't even the same as being made unplayable. There are lots of ways you could react to that in-character that could keep the game going with you in it, whether by becoming a villain or by following the RT to try your hardest to get back into his good graces. I want to stress that my assumption about your unwillingness to give up the artefact was about more than just your not including it in the list, because you also reacted badly to proposals including it, but if you insist that you're willing to consider that as a possibility then I'll accept that and it doesn't matter anymore.
Now, my only lasting grievance with you is this piece of shit.
Yes, obviously, you could change your story so that your character just lies to him and we all have to pretend not to know, but I hope it's obvious that that would be an incredible dick move. I imagine it would leave a sour taste in Caellath's mouth; it certainly would in mine. "Sorry, I wanted to tell you the truth, but your reaction was wrong, so I'm taking it back." Still, I'd accept it, but you can rest assured I'd be doing my best to find an excuse to uncover the truth afterward.
To quote yourself:
in the context of the game, your value as a player of the game is the enjoyment you are giving to other players. If people don't enjoy playing with you, your value as a player is negative and other people are not required to play with you. As of this last post, I feel that I have officially moved firmly into that camp, but I think this is something you can understand if you try to empathize with the other players.
You're literally declaring a personal vendetta against me, saying that even after the conflict between me and Cael is resolved you're going to hunt me down and fuck me over. By your own reasoning, you should kick yourself out.
Please retract your declaration of a vendetta. Thank you.
You're honestly very strange to me.
First of all, a dispute between just two players which other players don't care about is not the same as one player causing problems for multiple people. It is, at worst, cause for one of those players to leave if he wants to, like Caellath apparently does. I'd like to point out, in support of this, once again, that I said I
didn't want to kick you out, I only brought it up in the context of saying that, if even that level of punishment (in-game, effectively,
annihilation) is justified in the context of a player becoming a problem for others, then it's obvious that players don't have the right to demand certain limits to the treatment of their characters. So there's no rational universe where "by my own reasoning, I should kick myself out" - that's for Stirk to do if he thinks I'm being that much of a problem for
all the other players in general, which I can't imagine being the case. Although I will say that, based on the
reactions to this dispute and how it developed so far, I'd much rather have Caellath than you if it comes down to choosing between the two, because in that case I feel like this problem will not recur.
Second, me trying to find out, in-character, a secret that I know you're hiding out-of-character is not a vendetta. It may not be exceptionally kind, when the secret is something this serious, but it's a normal human response to being told something and then being expected to honor take-backsies because you didn't get the reaction you wanted. My character is just a paranoid person
in general and is going to be suspicious of
everyone after an event like that; you're just the lucky one who actually has something to hide. But this is an RPG - you should be reacting
-in-character if you don't want your secret getting out, by hiding it well and perhaps avoiding people who seem to be suspicious of you. I think this is the theme I keep coming back to, really... you are trying to make
out-of-character limits on how people respond to your choices
in-character, instead of playing the hand you dealt yourself, and I think that's fundamentally the wrong and a rather toxic approach to take to a TTRPG. If you had set out your limits ahead of time, I would have firmly said "no". Feeling that you're being "fucked over" by other people playing their characters the way they want (while you get to play yours the way you want by taking deals with daemons) is
the essence of what I'm describing as a problem player. It's not what I would consider a healthy way to play.
Caellath’s position expressed privately is that he doesn’t wanna get in a fight OOC and is more willing to leave the game then argue. [...] “Sick to my stomach” was his word choice.
This is what I figured and it's also deeply disappointing to me. Given that... not that I'd hate taking the rogue trader position over, but I think that, if he is committed to that decision,
-We don’t
becomes the best option.
Especially since, as much as I actually like Egan, I don't think this attitude is exactly mutual, so we don't really have any cohesive group left.
If Caellath will come back, though, and I really want to express that I think this situation is
not his fault and he has nothing to feel sick over, then I think this can still be resolved in a way that is basically acceptable to everyone if he will participate in negotiations.
Author
Topic: Rogue Trader: Laughing Gold (OOC) (Read 36235 times)