OOC Thread and Chatroom 2

[Ibn-Khaldun]

A shame I didn't read this 10 minutes ago. Thank you for clarifying the situation. I want to make it known that intentional rule violations will be dealt with very harshly in the future. Laxity has not served this game well and so it's time to start imposing penalties.

Unintentional rule violations (as with the above) will not be punished, as long as they are not repeated. If they are repeated, they will be considered intentional.

Can I ask what will be the punishment then?

[deguerra]

Sorry TC, I should have clarified that sooner.

As for your measures, those seem fine to me. I'll be more careful in the future.

[TinCow]

I will determine the punishment on a case by case basis. However, depending on the severity of the infraction they may include one or more of the following things:

1) Breaking of all oaths of fealty with a 5 turn penalty on re-swearing, and all the IC consequences that will result from this.
2) Loss of provinces.
3) Suspension from the game.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Thanks TC.
I'm bit smarter now. Hope that I wouldn't break any rules then.

[TinCow]

Again, I don't want to be a hardass, but this game won't work properly if the rules are violated. I really hope no one takes any of this personally, because I like ALL of the players in this game, but I'm the guy in charge and so it's my responsibility to deal with this stuff. I will not impose any penalties without allowing a person to speak in their own defense, but if a rule violation is intentional and/or repeated, I simply HAVE to punish it. I know the rules are complex, so if anyone EVER has any questions about whether something is legal or not, all you need to do is ask me. I will do my best to respond very quickly.

[deguerra]

just for the record, I understand your position, support it fully and thank you for all the hard work and willingness to be the bad guy in situations like these.

edit: me? sucking up to the event-er? never!

[Northnovas]

Just to clarify from my point and degurra's defence. I moved the cavlary unit at his request when I took the save because it hadn't moved from his save. I did not examine the stack or think there was an issue with the request. Though I am aware now of the rule moving avatas and the SOT. I can't keep abreast of all the rules everytime I am looking at the game. Hell I can't even remember the rank I have or what it involves.

I was unaware of the IC issues or politcal motives of avatars involved. I just followed a simple request from the last save. There is no agenda on my part or I feel on degurra's. There may have been some poor instructions in the initial request made has mentioned and technically should not have been made with the rule regarding avatar movement.

The mentioning of rules being broken should be made to an individual by pm rather then a very wide brush painting a picture that there is something more sinsiter involved when that is far from the truth.

[TinCow]

The mentioning of rules being broken should be made to an individual by pm rather then a very wide brush painting a picture that there is something more sinsiter involved when that is far from the truth.

The responses in here were made because it was brought up in the Magnaura. I have been heavily criticized in the not-so-distant past for doing nothing regarding rule violations, and the way it was initially brought up seemed to indicate that it was once again Igno who had broken a rule. I posted in the Magnaura in an attempt to head off a discussion that I expected to occur on that subject. I also PMed the parties involved. I then read deguerra's post indicating that he had made the move, not Igno, so I quickly back-pedaled, but decided to keep my public stance on rule violations out there just so that people would know that I am going to deal with it properly in the future. My posts were merely intended as information and not criticism of anyone.

Apparently I have once again botched my job as GM. Hopefully I'll get it right at some point in the future, because this is getting demoralizing.

[Privateerkev]

Sorry, I realize my OOC joke in the Senate about us not punishing "rule breakers" OOC, was in bad taste. I didn't think about the fact that there have been some real OOC debate and tension about the issue.

My stance in the Magnaura with this has been IC only. But the OOC joke was in poor taste so I apologize.

[TinCow]

Sorry, I realize my OOC joke in the Senate about us not punishing "rule breakers" OOC, was in bad taste. I didn't think about the fact that there have been some real OOC debate and tension about the issue.

My stance in the Magnaura with this has been IC only. But the OOC joke was in poor taste so I apologize.

It's not your fault, NN was right to call me on my actions. I should have taken a closer look at the situation and figured out what exactly had occurred before doing anything. Even then I should have done it privately and not through public posts. I am entirely in error on this. I've been under a bit of stress over the past week and I would like to think that it has impaired my judgment slightly and made me post before thinking. However, even if that's true it's still my responsibility and I'm the one who screwed up. It is therefore me who needs to apologize, not anyone else.

I do feel like I'm finally getting a hang of this job. I had no idea whatsoever that I was going to have to undertake this kind of a role when I created this game. I've been so used to econ21 handling all mod-related problems that it has all come as something of a harsh reality to me. I am adapting and learning from my errors and I do promise you that I will get it right in the future.

[Privateerkev]

I do feel like I'm finally getting a hang of this job. I had no idea whatsoever that I was going to have to undertake this kind of a role when I created this game. I've been so used to econ21 handling all mod-related problems that it has all come as something of a harsh reality to me. I am adapting and learning from my errors and I do promise you that I will get it right in the future.

Seeing as your main job seems to be balancing out all of our wildly erratic and different personalities, I think you are doing fine.

I imagine we are not an easy group of cats to herd.

[Northnovas]

Nothing to see here move along.

I have a question about Druzzo, who currently owns the settlement. It was discussed in some negotiations with Andres. I would just like to know the current ownership.

[Ferret]

I like ALL of the players in this game

Even me?

And don't worry you're doing great as GM, I think it is good to make your stance on rule violations public, as it makes people more careful about what they do in future, thus minimizing the chance of us breaking the rules in future.

edit: I think pever owns Durazzo

[Ibn-Khaldun]

NN .. I think pevergreen owns Durazzo..

[AussieGiant]

TC, I told you man...you're 30...if you think it gets better you just so wrong!!

**********

I'm giving you grief because I love ya mate!!

You're doing a great job! This is so more complex than KotR it's has to be understandable by everyone here.


By the way. Happy birthday

[Northnovas]

NN .. I think pevergreen owns Durazzo..

Thanks, I will check with him.

TC, I told you man...you're 30...if you think it gets better you just so wrong!!

**********

I'm giving you grief because I love ya mate!!

You're doing a great job! This is so more complex than KotR it's has to be understandable by everyone here.


By the way. Happy birthday

I already told him but it does get better over time it takes time. Just takes time my friend.
More complex than KotR is an understatement it is still all Greek to me.

[Ituralde]

Before I respond to anything of this IC, I'd like to get the OOC side straight. There are two issues currently.

1) Where does the power come from, that the Megas can seize units, that are under the command of a general at the beginning of a turn? The only rule about it that I can find is the following.

1.4 – Game Management: At the start of each turn, the Megas Logothetes will post an annual report on the events of the last turn, including a save game file for the new turn. After the annual report is posted, players will have 24 hours to download the save, and make their personal moves. Players can move their avatars, move any army (Private, Royal, or otherwise) their avatar commands, move any military units that start the turn inside a settlement they control (garrison units), move any military units that start the turn inside a fort in a province they control (fort units), and fight any battles against the AI that they are capable of fighting with their avatar’s army. The Megas Logothetes may move any avatar or army that has not been moved in this way as he best sees fit, including moves that result in battles, except that he cannot move a player’s avatar, Private/Royal Army, garrison units, or fort units in any manner that player has expressly prohibited.

The highlight is mine. I always understood that once the turn ends the Megas can do anything to units that weren't moved or disband those that were indeed moved. But before that all units that an avatar commands can be moved by that avatar. I haven't found anything in the powers part of the rules either. So is there even an OOC rule that was accidentally broken here?

2) Who designates which units belong to a Royal/Private Army? I haven't found anything in the rules about this, so I guess this falls to the Basileus who adjugates on rule disputes?
I figured it might cause problems IC what I did IC, but so far few people have bothered to exactly name the units that make up their PA/RA.
Once again we're close to the touchy subject of PAs/RAs and how the Megas can interact with them, bound by OOC rules, and by IC rules.
For example I could just as well have said, that Ioannis Kantakouzinos leads Pavlos PA and since Ioannis Kantakouzinos only has one Cavalry Unit, the Megas would be forced by the OOC rules to recruit the missing Infantry and missile units. I could even do it now in response to the Megas declaring my former move illegal. So I counter an IC measure from the Megas with an IC measure of mine that leads to retaliation on an OOC basis.

The more I think on the whole PA/RA business it creates a complete IC/OOC mess for me and I often find myself at a loss how to deal with this in an IC context.


So those are the two issues I have. I'm already curious about your responses!

[AussieGiant]

Thanks, I will check with him.

I already told him but it does get better over time it takes time. Just takes time my friend.
More complex than KotR is an understatement it is still all Greek to me.

You shouldn't have done that. I gave TC a big speech on nearly being dead...mid life crisis issues and sagging body parts

Ahh the good old days NN. Just you me and endless amounts of Hungarian's and Venetian's.

The eastern front they called it. Where men were murderers and drinking blood was all in vogue

[Ituralde]

Just an addendum to my point 2).

I think the rules would support what I did with Pavlos. They say that I own a Private Army. Later on it is said that my army consists of so and so much troops. Where those troops are is never mentioned. So the Megas can't take those units away from me, no matter where they are.
Just my take on it. It makes more sense for the general to say where his troops are than for the Megas to say this. Of course always accounting for garrison related things from the SoT!

[Privateerkev]

Before I respond to anything of this IC, I'd like to get the OOC side straight. There are two issues currently.

1) Where does the power come from, that the Megas can seize units, that are under the command of a general at the beginning of a turn? The only rule about it that I can find is the following.



The highlight is mine. I always understood that once the turn ends the Megas can do anything to units that weren't moved or disband those that were indeed moved. But before that all units that an avatar commands can be moved by that avatar. I haven't found anything in the powers part of the rules either. So is there even an OOC rule that was accidentally broken here?

The Megas can seize anything that isn't currently locked, or started the turn locked.

So, once a unit starts its turn out in the field, and it is not in a legal army, the Megas can "seize" it.

I don't know if we can use the "how to be Megas" post as "canon" but here is a good quote:

You may also remove any unit from a stack commanded by another player’s avatar, as long as that stack is not a Royal or Private Army. Avatars in commands like this are essentially serving at your pleasure, and you can use their units however you want.

What this means is, if you start a turn with a unit(s) out in the field, and it isn't a PA/RA, then you can only use that unit at the Megas's pleasure.

2) Who designates which units belong to a Royal/Private Army? I haven't found anything in the rules about this, so I guess this falls to the Basileus who adjugates on rule disputes?
I figured it might cause problems IC what I did IC, but so far few people have bothered to exactly name the units that make up their PA/RA.
Once again we're close to the touchy subject of PAs/RAs and how the Megas can interact with them, bound by OOC rules, and by IC rules.
For example I could just as well have said, that Ioannis Kantakouzinos leads Pavlos PA and since Ioannis Kantakouzinos only has one Cavalry Unit, the Megas would be forced by the OOC rules to recruit the missing Infantry and missile units. I could even do it now in response to the Megas declaring my former move illegal. So I counter an IC measure from the Megas with an IC measure of mine that leads to retaliation on an OOC basis.

The more I think on the whole PA/RA business it creates a complete IC/OOC mess for me and I often find myself at a loss how to deal with this in an IC context.


So those are the two issues I have. I'm already curious about your responses!

You designate what units are yours but you only get 1 "stack." You can not "claim" multiple stacks in the field are parts of your one army. It is one army = one stack. As long as the Megas makes sure the army is up to "code," he can ignore all of the other "claims" made on seperate units. If you want certain units to become part of your army, you need to find ways to jump them from one lockable structure to another so the Megas can not seize them.

One thing to keep in mind, is that if a unit started a turn in a locked structure, then the Megas can not disband it that same turn. But he can next turn. Which is what I've been doing.

*edit*

And yes, you can claim that only the cavalry is your current army and the former army is a garrison. This is what I call "garrison dumping." While legal OOC I will guarentee harsh IC consequences. ^_^

[AussieGiant]

Ituralde,

I see your point but honestly, it is perfectly acceptable for me as Megas to interpret the rules as I "think" they were intended to be designed.

That might sound overbearing and arrogant but I simply could not stand this type of conduct.

If someone pulled a move like that I'd simply overrule them, tell them straight that it's BS and keep on moving. If they didn't like it then I'd hand it over to TC.

You have an army, it's a RA or PA, if you want to try and reclassify it or do something like that then bad luck.

The issue I have now is the slippery slope of introducing more and more verbiage to try and resolve this type of stuff. By introducing more verbiage you provide more material to "interpret", it becomes a never ending cycle.

In Australian Law, applying "Common Sense" is still allowed. In some respects it is the exact opposite of the US legal system and it does have it's advantages

I have a few US law friends who secretly wish for something similar.

[Privateerkev]

You have an army, it's a RA or PA, if you want to try and reclassify it or do something like that then bad luck.

The issue I have now is the slippery slope of introducing more and more verbiage to try and resolve this type of stuff. By introducing more verbiage you provide more material to "interpret", it becomes a never ending cycle.

He can claim his army is now a "garrison," lock it in, and demand a new shiny army based around that one cavalry unit. This would be perfectly legal OOC. IC, the Megas does have many tools to make sure punishment would be harsh and swift however.

For one, the Megas can refuse to recruit or build anything in the Empire at all until he unlocks the "garrison." Good old fashioned peer pressure could work wonders...

[Ibn-Khaldun]

For one, the Megas can refuse to recruit or build anything in the Empire at all until he unlocks the "garrison." Good old fashioned peer pressure could work wonders...

Now.. And how long that Megas will stay in power if he does something like that to person who have a lot of support??
If the Megas will irritate others too much then soon his relations with others would look like this = And the things that will fly towards the Megas wouldn't be tomatos but some pointy sticks instead

[Ituralde]

So concerning point 1) you agree with me that there is nothing about this in the Rules? Which means that there is no actual OOC rule broken? IC this might lead to some discussion, but this is not one of those terrible OOC rule breaks, we're talking about here, right?


As to point 2) I can agree that we interpret the rules in the way you described. Meaning a PA/RA always has to be one single stack. I had interpreted it differently before, but I can see your point.

[Privateerkev]

Now.. And how long that Megas will stay in power if he does something like that to person who have a lot of support??
If the Megas will irritate others too much then soon his relations with others would look like this = And the things that will fly towards the Megas wouldn't be tomatos but some pointy sticks instead

It is a balancing act. It takes 2/3rds to impeach the Megas. Not to mention the fact that only 2 people in the game right now can call an emergency session.

So, as Megas, you need to keep enough people happy to ensure your position, while also compelling people to follow your orders. Garrsion dumping is one of those things that the Megas can only enforce IC. He'd have to make the case that the practice is hurting the Empire. (And with such a weak economy, that would be a fairly easy case ATM.)

There are many "tools" of diplomacy he can use. One is to shut down all spending for a year. Then, as long as a little more than 1/3 of the Senators agree with him, he can keep doing it until the offender concedes.

[Ibn-Khaldun]

That's true..

But still Megas should be careful because if he makes too maky enemies then they might gang up on him And that means the Megas might find a sword or two(or three) in his body

[Privateerkev]

So concerning point 1) you agree with me that there is nothing about this in the Rules? Which means that there is no actual OOC rule broken? IC this might lead to some discussion, but this is not one of those terrible OOC rule breaks, we're talking about here, right?

No, its in the rules but you already quoted the rule and TC said it better in the "how to be Megas" post.

Here is the rule:

1.4 – Game Management: At the start of each turn, the Megas Logothetes will post an annual report on the events of the last turn, including a save game file for the new turn. After the annual report is posted, players will have 24 hours to download the save, and make their personal moves. Players can move their avatars, move any army (Private, Royal, or otherwise) their avatar commands, move any military units that start the turn inside a settlement they control (garrison units), move any military units that start the turn inside a fort in a province they control (fort units), and fight any battles against the AI that they are capable of fighting with their avatar’s army. The Megas Logothetes may move any avatar or army that has not been moved in this way as he best sees fit, including moves that result in battles, except that he cannot move a player’s avatar, Private/Royal Army, garrison units, or fort units in any manner that player has expressly prohibited. Any player involved in a Civil War may give permission for another player to move their avatar and armies by posting that information in a public thread. The Megas Logothetes may extend the time limit beyond 24 hours at his discretion, but all players are encouraged to act as swiftly as possible to keep the game moving. 1.4 Addendum - Players may not move avatars or armies into the territory of a neutral or allied faction without the permission of the Basileus. Nor may they attack the settlements or armies of neutral or allied factions without a declaration of war from the Basileus, a Megas Dux/Exarch or an Edict. (Added by CA 2.1.)

So, since that Armenian Cav started this turn out of a garrison/fort/PA/RA, it can not be locked by any player. Since it can not be locked, the Megas has full and complete control over it. He can order it moved somewhere else, not moved at all, or disbanded.

I don't know what TC meant by "otherwise" but I don't believe it was meant to allow people to move units all over the board without the Megas's permission. If something is not locked in an army/fort/settlement, then that unit is the property of the Megas and can only be used by others with his express permission.

So, unless I can be convinced that a single unit in the field, is an "otherwise army," when we have never ever described "otherwise armies," then I will keep going by the route I am going.

As to point 2) I can agree that we interpret the rules in the way you described. Meaning a PA/RA always has to be one single stack. I had interpreted it differently before, but I can see your point.

I just got that from TC earlier today. I saw your SOT post claiming two differnt "stacks" as your army so I wanted to be sure.

[TinCow]

I am responding to this, please hold on the rules debate for a moment.

[TinCow]

Alright, let's see if I can clarify this. I see the confusion that arises from "or otherwise" in Rule 1.4. That language might warrant an edit at the next Senate session to avoid further confusion. For now, I think it will help to do a review of the overall situation of what a person can command.

The only armies that an avatar can actually own are PAs, RAs, and garrisons (of settlements and forts). Everything outside of those armies is subject to the whims of the Megas. If he says you can use an army that isn't one of the above and move it however you want, then you can. If he says you can't, then you can't. A good baseline would be to simply identify your "owned" armies and then to consider everything else as belonging to the Megas exclusively.

So, we then need to determine what qualifies as an owned army. Garrisons of settlements and forts are easy, because they are aways located in the same place. Remove them, and they are no longer a garrison and thus no longer "owned" unless they happen to have been moved into a PA/RA.

As for what constitutes a PA/RA, that isn't stated by the rules. My intention was that a PA/RA be a single stack of units and thus anything that is not inside that stack would not be "owned." However, since it isn't in the rules I think it's fair to let the Megas determine if he wants to allow multiple stacks to constitute the PA/RA. If the Megas says two stacks are your PA, then those two stacks are yours to move as you see fit. However, if the Megas says that you can only have one stack as your PA, you'll have to pick one. Whatever is not in that stack can be disposed of as the Megas sees fit.

Now, this doesn't mean that your army just evaporates. The Megas still has to make sure you meet the minimum requirements. If taking the second stack away from you results in you falling below the minimum requirements, he has to replace it with other units that meet the requirements. However, he is free to replace them with very poor quality units, such as PK has already done for a couple avatars.

This is the risk that you take by having a hostile Megas in power. If you are not careful, he can steal your army away and replace it with weak cannon fodder. It is very highly recommended that all players keep their PAs/RAs in a single stack which is clearly IDed in the SOT. If it needs to be reinforced, hammer the Megas IC and OOC to do so, but you should still consider that single stack alone to be your PA/RA. This is particularly important when it comes to owning high-quality units. If you happen to get your hands on a really good quality unit, you need to take care of it. Do NOT let it out of your sight and be careful not to let it die in battle because if you lose it you have no guarantees that it will replaced with something of the same quality.

In general, PAs and RAs are intended to be the equivalent of a massive bodyguard for your avatar. It goes where you go and is centered around you alone. If you give command of your PA/RA to someone else, then it is centered around that person until you resume command or shift it to a completely different person. If you split your army up intentionally, you are risking the Megas exploiting the split and should thus only do it if the Megas is friendly to you.

Remember... a hostile Megas IS BAD. If someone wins an election who is hostile to you, the best response is to hunker down and conserve your forces until a more friendly Megas can be put into power (either by waiting for the next election or choosing 'other' methods to get rid of the current one). If you keep campaigning and expanding your territory, you risk losing the forces you have accumulated. It is far, far safer to campaign under a friendly Megas than a hostile Megas. A friendly Megas should be considered a time of a 'good harvest.' You will gain territories, your settlements will be improved, and your armies will increase in size and quality. A hostile Megas should be considered a time of a 'bad harvest.' You will most likely have to make due with whatever resources you have managed to save up and anything you waste during that time will be very difficult to replace.

1) Where does the power come from, that the Megas can seize units, that are under the command of a general at the beginning of a turn? The only rule about it that I can find is the following.

This is thinking about the situation backwards. The Megas never has to seize anything, because it all belongs to him. The only people who can seize anything are the other players. If it's not in your garrison, RA, or PA, then it wasn't yours in the first place. The Megas can allow you to move units that are not yours, but you do not have any legal ownership over them. Again the "or otherwise" language is definitely confusing, and I will mark that down on my list of things to correct at the next Senate session.

[TinCow]

FYI, it is my intention to create two more instructional posts in the FAQ/Rules thread. One will be entitled So You Want To Be An Exarch and it will be a guide for regular players on how to gain rank and power and avoid being manhandled by the Megas. If you know anything about D&D, the Exarch guide will be the 'Player's Handbook' to complement the Megas guide, which is the 'DM's Handbook.' The second one will be entitled the Code of Conduct and will be a set of rules on OOC behavior in LotR. This will be a BINDING set of rules that I will be imposing as a moderator of the Throne Room, not as GM of LotR. This will deal with general OOC issues, such as violation of LotR rules, using other players' characters in stories without their permission, and similar issues which must be addressed outside of the game.