Factions

Fred said:

Because if the FM's commodity - the GM - becomes out of the equation, then the playerbase underneath is what hurts. This causes damage - it happened before, it happened recently, and it will happen again the moment a FM abuses his power, or a GM stands up for his creative freedom in running his plot (and I actually refer to GMs that already set for themselves a high benchmark, and not for a GM to just pull of wierd excrement-related-word).

Click to expand...

I am going to assume that since I was mentioned in one of your posts on the matter, and that you later speak of some recent event where an FM "abused their power," that you are either intentionally or unintentionally speaking about what happened between myself and the other party, and completely framing the event in either a very biased or ignorant manner.

So here I am to defend myself in this matter, since you've decided to open this wound.

Since I am the subject of one of the topics related to this issue, note that my judgement call was based off of a highly disrespectful series of reactions from certain parties in response to one of my decisions. I would provide proof and specifics however that would derail this conversation even further and devolve the thread into something worse. It was absolutely not a case of an FM "abusing his power" against a GM "standing up for their creative freedom" in a plot.

It was a case of policing up clear, and what eventually developed into near-malicious, disrespect.

Thank you for standing on a soap box and inferring things in such a public manner without all the information regarding a particular event. Am I being defensive? Yes, anyone would be when another party goes on the attack, either intentionally or unintentionally.

Anyways, regarding the FM/GM power structure:

As a GM you are allotted the freedom to RP as you wish within a specific framework defined by the FM. You have the right to try and change that framework by appealing to the FM, but if the FM in the end decides not to change it, then it is on the GM to comply.

I would also like to dilute and even dispel this notion of FM "supremacy" with regards to the GMs. The relationship is hierarchical although colored a bit as symbiotic, in that both roles depend highly upon each other.

The decision to let a good GM go is absolutely not a light one, and highlights the precarious position FMs are in: Do I let this GM go and threaten a plot, or do I let them do as they please and put my position and faction at risk? I had to make such a decision in my case, and thus am potentially faced with a plot full of players who see me as someone who cut off their fun.

So don't tell FMs like me how "privileged" we are. Your input as a GM is important, however it is not enough to make sweeping generalizations about how GMs and FMs are characterized in such a way as to completely dictate site policy.

All that out of the way, I support the idea of a "Will" for factions that clearly delineates the line of succession as to who becomes FM, and also should outline who shall not become FM (the latter made available in the GM/FM forums or somehow privately in order to avoid site drama by placing it in a highly public place.)

I do not however believe in making it a requirement that an FM be engaged with GMing a plot. It already spreads the FM fairly thin and does not allow him/her to focus fully on the faction. Furthermore, it has always been my belief that the FM should be invested in the faction and not the plot, and thus should be objective in their decisions. I do not believe that GMing a plot is conducive to this desired trait.

I do however think that the three month rule should still apply to players wishing to create a faction. Not only are they more invested in the site after RPing in our established plots, but through RP they gain the ability to understand the nuances and relations between the factions, or at least understand how they work in order to better and more fully represent our site. If this reeks of "gatekeeper"ism, that represents a lack of faith put in new players that they can have the personal ability to put in their own time and look past the boundaries of the faction they wish to create. This approach breeds and cultivates not just good roleplayers, but also enriches our players at a personal level both with respect to and outside of roleplaying.

Most of what I feel is pretty even across the board with everyone else. I think that all of these requirements are reasonable (if not something I particularly like), with the exception of the same two (8&9). I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to wait before taking up positions of responsibility again. To go off of your examples, someone who was hospitalized could have a relapse with little warning, and the most common timeframe for that is the first 6 months. Or there could be just flat out complications. Someone who gets arrested could have further legal issues impinging on their time. 3-6 months of waiting isn't much to ask from someone who is really interested in being a major contributor to the setting, and a key trait for FMs and GMs should be patience anyway. If they can't find it in them to wait a bit while there's nothing in progress, how can we expect them to be patient in the middle of something once they get it going?

The 3-month timeframe for new players is something I'll never agree with removing. If anything, I'd recommend extending it out to 6 months, unless the submission is sponsored or specifically requested by someone who's been around a bit longer. It's never been about not thinking new members have anything to contribute (Hell, look at Jaeger and Eistheid), but more about them just flat out not knowing enough about the setting yet to really contribute effectively. This site is a lot to take in, and that's a big change coming from pretty much literally any other RP out there that I've ever seen, so they need to be given that time period to adjust and settle themselves in before they add stuff. I'm not going to say anything more on this, because this is an argument I've had literally hundreds of times at this point.

@Koenig808 You're wrong.

I skimmed. Past the first paragraph anyways, since I had an idea of what you would say. The answer is no, you didn't have to defend yourself, since I was not targeting you, so much as my personnal experience with Wes.

My allusions regarding your situation with Cadetnewb is that it's a shame it turned out that way. Regardless of whom was to blame, the end result is still a good GM not being there to manage a good plot with a significant playerbase. Now a new GM needs to be named, and the playerbase is what ends up suffering in that drama. If in hindsight there would be extra ways to avoid things snowballing this badly, I think that would be worth exporing.

Fred said:

@Koenig808 You're wrong.

My allusions regarding your situation with Cadetnewb is that it's a shame it turned out that way. Regardless of whom was to blame, the end result is still a good GM not being there to manage a good plot with a significant playerbase. Now a new GM needs to be named, and the playerbase is what ends up suffering in that drama. If in hindsight there would be extra ways to avoid things snowballing this badly, I think that would be worth exporing.

Click to expand...

Is a GM still good if he wants to ruin his FM's reputation and refuses to follow his orders or accept a FM decision on the stats of a weapon in an optional damage system that he could ignore in his plot?

I will not get into the Cadetnewb/Kampfer conflict, who was right and whom was wrong. That's a can of worm I don't really want to get into. Wes himself wanted to steer clear of that too.

I will say that Sledge Mama has been running since 2014 with a good level of membership, and seems to have done well enough for itself. To me, this means Cadetnewb was doing something right. So yes, I think he did a good job. Wes obviously thought so too before he got to have the whole story. Doing some things wrong doesn't invalidate the things that were done right.

Yes, Cadetnewb did some things that ended up being GM suicide. But that doesn't mean that before the debacle, he wasn't doing a good job. People screw up, people aren't always as good as they should be. Cadetnewb isn't the first, and won't be the last.

What interests me is improving damage control to better avoid these breaking points.

Replies to this thread need to stay on topic.

This is about improving our policy to ease future conflicts, not to argue over stuff that already happened.

This weekend I will be rewriting the stuff in the OP based on the feedback I've got here. I'll also be trying to write a faction will for Yamatai that will serve as a model.

I thought it was time I put my hat in, since I seem to be in or around most of the conflicts mentioned, even if I don't remember my role according to other peoples version of events.


Regarding Faction Inheritance

This is something I'm surprised no one has thought about before. From the very start of making my own faction I have left "deaddrops" that should I disappear some day out of the blue, my selected disciples would have authority over my (former) faction, and probably a rough outline of a plan, but with the knowledge I had full confidence in them. I suppose I could stand to formalize them onto the wiki and update them, on the whole, I agree with the idea of a Will, of sorts.

I might also humbly suggest what I refer to as a Faction Design Document, an informal blueprint as it were for the cardinal rules and sins of a faction, at least as far as tech design and style go. Basically to give a clear view of examples, ramblings, and writings from the FM about how they envisage making stuff for the faction.


Regarding the Gartagen Incident

A major part of this fracas is not only that Ira left without saying a word, but also the timing of his return. I have been having the "death" of the gartagen faction thrown at my feet a lot recently. But ask what more should I have done when I not only have my own faction, but this forcefully adopted faction that was thrust upon me is having its reputation dragged through the mud and overwhelming me to the point where I spent years, years trying to repair and soothe relations with players and other FM's about it?

Not only that, but Ira's posting after his return did not inspire me with confidence, reading it sounded rather passive aggressive and expectant to the point of arrogance. It indeed felt like a stab in the back that I had done what I could with what little I had, and I was having "failure" thrown at me while the person who had left me with the mess involved was treated as the second coming of the messiah by some. So yes, perhaps a lack of goodwill has made the process so much rougher than it needed to be.

I tell you this not to complain, only to cast perspective on one side of the debate. As part-custodian of the gartagen race I did not expect gratitude, but neither did I expect my invisible work to be so unseen that the administration had no inkling of it and cast my goodwill in doubt. I would have thought the lack of REMOVE GART memes at this years International Relations Conference would have been proof enough. Clearly not.


Regarding New Players Making Factions

I am a firm believer that in SARP you make your own name. Your writing and your skills are all that matters, and if you can write well and learn our ways you will earn the trust of the community. By giving someone the title of Faction Manager we trust them to not only make something, but to make it for the betterment of the entire setting.

Letting new players who haven't even had a chance to get into an established plot bring their ideas into the setting in a way that broadly affects us as a whole does not engender goodwill, and I believe has a negative impact on the potential recruit as they spend their time worldbuilding rather then roleplaying and making the contacts they will need to get their faction or plot running within the rest of the setting. I say this not to be cruel, but to be kind.


Regarding FM's Versus GM's

A sticky topic, I have already been accused of opposing FM rights at some point even though I am (technically) one myself. My only position has always been the the relationship between the two requires mutual trust and goodwill, without both disaster looms. However, part of SARP is that there are many FM's to choose, and so GM's are free to host their plots and cooperate with one they feel the can work with. It is almost symbiotic, as has been said before.

Even within factions, there are Co-FM's that can be spoken to instead if personal relations are too sour. Abusing your friendly neighborhood FM is not a good way to go about business. So GM's, go forth and prosper. The universe is yours.


Regarding Dormant Factions

Many of the factions listed as Dead on the provided list remain alive in peoples memories and nostalgia, and I myself am guilty of having made abwheran characters to fill plots and other ideas with a variety of species. Part of the problem is the shortage of GM's not already in their own plots, and the difficulties of starting plots in such factions.

Abwherans are safely cloistered in the inner sphere of the cluster, what external threat could they face other than yamatai and its overwhelming superiority? Such was one of the reasons I made chelti, and made them off map to be a looming external threat to all on the edge of the cluster, but that's not important here. Abwherans have little without making drastic faction affecting changes that might be like sacrificing the sacred cow to some.

The Freespacers were left with nothing after the genocide, their GM left, their players left with ash in their mouths. What a horrible disaster that befell them. I can not blame GM's for not being able to produce a plot from such desolation.

The Iromakuane are a product of being exotic for the sake of being exotic. It is impossible for outsiders like me to truly understand their inner workings without having played in them myself. Exhack ran them, sometimes very well. But he is now gone. Kokuten played with them, but he too has gone for now. Who is left that truly understands this enigma? One cannot blame GM's for this.

I have already spoken on gartagens.


General Conclusions

-Faction "Wills" are a good idea and I'm surprised they're only now recieving formal attention
-The thing with the gartagens is partly a matter of coincidence and bad timing, as well as personal disagreements. It probably shouldn't be used as precedent for anything given how messy the situation is.
-Day One players making factions is a terrible idea and they should be made to prove themselves in deadly trial by combat to build strength on the bodies of the weak.
-GM's and FM's need to have some sort of trust and goodwill between each other in order to function, otherwise no amount of rules will make this work..
-Factions are hard, okay.

Regarding breaking point management between GM and FM, one thing I think ought to be done is a degree of peer review.

I'd see the FM and GM being involved, but otherwise have more impartial people sit in and mediate - that means setting admin and the people that might be sitting on the staff (whereas people from other same-faction plots stay out). Each person can then make its case. I'll use the conflict Wes and I had as an example:

Subject matter: Fred is opposed that the Battle of Yamatai be the final capstone for his plot.
(@Wes it's been awhile, pray forgive any historical innaccuracy; I'm trying to be objective, but probably failing to keep my bias out of this. It's hard)


I think some degree of stewing/putting other decisions on hold ought to also be employed. A lot of these events have the trend of one party being really passionate about something/getting riled up. An opportunity to catch one's breath and take a step back to re-evaluate the problem being addressed, the bigger picture and what actually matters could help. I know it happens a lot that people get worked up, and given a few days to stew over something, can afterwards be more rational about the subject matter.

Finally, if a difference is still there between the two and that there's an impasse, I'd propose the GM's playerbase be involved in weighting in. They'd see two sides of the argument, and then contribute by saying what actually matters to them. Both FM and GM are supposed to serve that playerbase and hearing what they want out of all of this is going back in the direction of "stick to what matters" beyond big plans and big ideas in order to keep things fun.

Had this been a thing before in the debacle I had with Wes, there could have been observations like "Wes, Fred has been successfully GMing this for five years, I'd rather go for his vision of how this should end" to "Fred, if it's a dealbreaker, we don't actually mind our actions not making as much of a difference. Don't quit over that. Let's just get through this, not let this OoC drama ruin things, and then just make the next thing we'll do together more to our liking."

I would do a lot of things for the sake of my players, but I'm not immune to getting carried away. I can still think that I was right and Wes was wrong, but I still shouldn't have gotten carried away. I know in hindsight that if I had been told by my players that I cared too much about this one specific thing I overvalued for their sake that things might have gone very differently. I probably would have dropped it right then and there if I had been given that argument on top of my being less fervent/more objective over it.

And if that's not enough, then the Staff weights in for the best possible compromise. For the above case, it might have been "Wes, please slow your pacing down." Wes and I would likely have been equally unhappy (him for slowing his plot to my own's slower pace; me for relenting on most of my points) but the breaking point would've been dodged.

Just want to give a *friendly reminder* (Btw thank you @Eistheid for bringing it up earlier) but I did make that lovely How To Use A Faction template for this very reason, though it's not. . . QUITE a will. So yeah. Just reminding y'all that exists. For this reason.

I have since updated the template with a will section.

You're welcome.