+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. (/showthread.php?tid=120394)
On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - GrnRaptor - 09-10-2014
There have been a few things going on the server of late that have brought the topic of SRPs, or Special Roleplays, to the fore in my mind, and I'd like to take this opportunity to discuss and get clarification on some points. Primarily, I'm investigating how a faction would ooRPly/inRPly oppose a player's SRP request when it deals with technology that their lore says they are responsible for developing.
To begin with a definition, an SRP is a request by a player or group to operate a vessel and/or set of equipment that they typically would not have access to in roleplay without a severe or crippling penalty in powercore, or to get around an ID limitation. There a whole bunch of rules, found here, regulating how an application is to be performed. What's lacking however is any regulation dealing with how to handle an SRP being opposed by the group that controls the technology being SRPed.
The two cases in point that I have in mind deal with the two separate groups I'm in, so it's relevant to me personally, but it would also be good to establish these grounds for everyone to deal with. The first is of course the case of the .:j:.Res_Nullius and the Unione Corse's opposition to its ownership by the Sirian Junkers, while the second is the impending SRP of the Alaska.Grey by the Liberty Rogue Colors group which was/is/will be opposed by the 101st Ghosts of Razgriz. Both of these are likely to continue going forward despite the inRP objections of the factions actively seeking to oppose their continuance, not to consider any ooRP objections such as "we'd never leave our ship there for you to find" or "you have no real source of obtaining that". The cases in point tend to break down into the following style of argument.
X: I want ship Z from Y faction.
Y: We don't want you to have ship Z from us.
X: Well, I want it, so too bad. And good luck stopping me!
This argument can be any mix of inRP or ooRP in nature, but that's the basic structure. While group Y can typically have group X's ship Z shot at, it doesn't really do more than inconvenience group X, and it certainly doesn't stop group X from having ship Z. Which falls into the following, I believe.
Community Rules Wrote:1.Not allowed on Discovery forums or server:
1.1 Use of abusive, vulgar, obscene, political, or racist materials
1.2 Trolling or harassing other members of the community
1.3 Advertising, especially commercial advertising, except advertising your own gaming websites or servers
1.4 Adult content or links to it; This also includes any anime that is in any way graphic or pornographic
1.5 Libel, defamatory, threatening materials and any law-violating materials
1.6 Use of copyrighted material without the owner's permission
1.7 Metagaming* and/or powergaming** to gain a roleplay benefit for factions, groups or individuals
**Powergaming: When one character forces actions against another player without giving them the chance to respond, affecting and/or interfering with the other characters roleplay.
So, as it stands currently, an opposed SRP is railroaded past the objections of the faction with no means of redressal being made available to them. What can be done to change this? Are these objections already being considered in the evaluation of the SRP, and we're simply not told? Are there practical ooRP and inRP actions that can be recognized by the Administrative team? What are your thoughts on how this should be dealt with? I look forward to the discussion.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - n00bl3t - 09-10-2014
I think the approach is that it's not powergaming because it's recognised as roleplay by the Administrators.
Past that, it's whether the Administrators are apt to decide what is and isn't powergaming.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - aerelm - 09-10-2014
Even back in 4.85 and when the old techchart was still in effect and before the SRPs were closed, one of the main uses of the SRP system was to work around the restrictions official factions tried to enforce on their technology. Apart from the few factions which didn't hand out any technology to anyone other than allied official factions and chose to keep their tech closed to individuals, there were also those which didn't grant their technology to certain people for certain reasons. So, you can say going for a SRP was a valid option even when the factions had actual control over their technology.
There are two sides to the coin you've tossed on the discussion table: On one hand, you as the faction would not like or approve of a roleplay and have your own reasons for it, but on the other hand, the owner of the character may have put actual time and effort into its background and has managed to properly justify their use of the technology and would not want to see all that effort go to waste. That's when SRPs come into play, which in a way act as admins stepping in and deciding which side of the coin outweighs the other, so, the faction trying to continue denying the tech after its been approved through SRP can be considered just as much powergaming as the player going for a SRP despite the faction having denied his request already.
On that note, just as n00bl3t pointed out such SRPs having received admin approval can in no way be considered powergaming, and even though I understand your concern I'm afraid trying to label it as such just to strengthen your own argument is somewhat of a cheap shot. Your main concern is the official factions having near to no say when it comes to people they disapprove of proceeding with SRPing their tech, and frankly, as someone who's been on both sides of this very same coin back in the more extreme conditions of the 4.85-era techchart, my personal opinion is that if the roleplay and effort someone's put into a character to justify their use of a faction technology is good enough to have it successfully SRPed, it's the official faction that's at fault for not having approved of that tech when the player approached them.
Also a somewhat off-topic, yet relevant note: The l'Ane is considered a generic Gallic unlawful transport, which despite originating from a Brigand design produced with the help of the Corse, has found its way to the less legal side of the open market and is no longer exclusively owned by any specific faction, just like how the Sirius counterpart of it was originally of a Rogue design produced with the help of the Mollys. So the Corse claiming powergaming in this particular case is just like LR- claiming that some hypothetical Gallic Junker who's gotten an approved SRP to use a PTrans is powergaming their faction. So if anything, the Corse faction is simply overreacting (considering even if anyone did own the tech it would've been the Brigands, not the Corse) and making a huge fuss about nothing.
P.S: Needless to say, no offense or disrespect intended. The only reason this post may seem directed at one particular player or group a tad more than it should is because you (the OP) yourself brought up the specific situation with your own faction as an example.
There are two sides to the coin you've tossed on the discussion table: On one hand, you as the faction would not like or approve of a roleplay and have your own reasons for it, but on the other hand, the owner of the character may have put actual time and effort into its background and has managed to properly justify their use of the technology and would not want to see all that effort go to waste. That's when SRPs come into play, which in a way act as admins stepping in and deciding which side of the coin outweighs the other, so, the faction trying to continue denying the tech after its been approved through SRP can be considered just as much powergaming as the player going for a SRP despite the faction having denied his request already.
On that note, just as n00bl3t pointed out such SRPs having received admin approval can in no way be considered powergaming, and even though I understand your concern I'm afraid trying to label it as such just to strengthen your own argument is somewhat of a cheap shot. Your main concern is the official factions having near to no say when it comes to people they disapprove of proceeding with SRPing their tech, and frankly, as someone who's been on both sides of this very same coin back in the more extreme conditions of the 4.85-era techchart, my personal opinion is that if the roleplay and effort someone's put into a character to justify their use of a faction technology is good enough to have it successfully SRPed, it's the official faction that's at fault for not having approved of that tech when the player approached them.
Also a somewhat off-topic, yet relevant note: The l'Ane is considered a generic Gallic unlawful transport, which despite originating from a Brigand design produced with the help of the Corse, has found its way to the less legal side of the open market and is no longer exclusively owned by any specific faction, just like how the Sirius counterpart of it was originally of a Rogue design produced with the help of the Mollys. So the Corse claiming powergaming in this particular case is just like LR- claiming that some hypothetical Gallic Junker who's gotten an approved SRP to use a PTrans is powergaming their faction. So if anything, the Corse faction is simply overreacting (considering even if anyone did own the tech it would've been the Brigands, not the Corse) and making a huge fuss about nothing.
P.S: Needless to say, no offense or disrespect intended. The only reason this post may seem directed at one particular player or group a tad more than it should is because you (the OP) yourself brought up the specific situation with your own faction as an example.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - KaiserDietz - 09-10-2014
Even with that said, there should be some sort of system for officials to raise concerns over the use of their technology. I understand that the Admins are the ones making the decisions, but without appropriate dialogue everyone gets frustrated.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Arioch - 09-10-2014
As said above though, it's not a faction-specific ship. If it was a Corse-only ship, then it might be wise yes to have the SRP requester to speak with Officials. But the L'Ane is a generic Gallic unlawful ship. It is not owned by one faction. Just like the Ptran is not belonging to one faction. So you saying that officials should be able to raise concerns over THEIR technology is null in this argument, considering what I and Aerelm mentioned.
On the flip side, and this is my own opinion, I think before an SRP goes through, if you are requesting a faction-specific ship, then it would courteous to RP with said faction first.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Echo 7-7 - 09-10-2014
When voting on a SRP, whether or not player has RP'd with the owners (either cooperatively or adversarial) usually plays a part in gauging overall credibility. There are no specific criteria in terms of who to interact with, but having some interaction with the faction that can plausibly supply the tech is beneficial.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - SnakThree - 09-10-2014
Why would official factions try to deny SRP which is approved by admins? Is it so bad that an individual is rewarded for his efforts? What's with the obsessive attitude that official faction could veto the SRP? Oh wait, official factions have such status due to their effort put and recognition from admins, which is actually the same as SRP approval.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Sath - 09-10-2014
So basically, if I wanted to SRP any ship, either
1. I can skip the part on how I got the ship and still get a SRP approved (is it possible?)
2. I can tell that I got the wreck of the ship from somewhere and built upon it?
Both of these seem to be the only way if the official factions that have a control over the ship are not involved in the SRP. What other ways can be there to justify how he acquired the ship? (seriously, these are the only two ways I know). Also, this is yet another situation where there is no point in being official (no difference from an indy/unofficial group)
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - SnakThree - 09-10-2014
You can claim you captured it. You can claim that the crew deserted... Honestly, SRPs are about imagination and I don't see the problem in faction being unable to veto SRP. If someone SRPed for Spyglass Scanner, I wouldn't mind it. If the staff deemed individuals efforts good enough to be rewarded I would only happy that it happened and that the person has reached his goal.
RE: On opposing SRPs: A discussion. - Sath - 09-10-2014
Capturing it and a deserted crew kinda come under recovering the wreck. It is not about veto'ing a SRP, but what advantages does an official faction have except for the burden of keeping up the time on the tracker and forcefully doing forum RP, when and where requested to do so.