Non-toxic PvP
-
Yeah. I’m not trying to be dense but I don’t see this as rising to the level of zero tolerance and inherently toxic.
On SH there is plenty of the opposite and arguably worse:
Low XP cafe worker: <very mild joke>
SuperStat McFighty who Never Takes Shit From No One: OMG WHAT DID YOU SAY?! I’M GOING TO STAB YOU!!!
And some of that is funny but a lot of it is eye roll inducing.
And the best defense is:
Low xp cafe worker: Okay come stab me quick then because I got shit to do today.
So honestly I think some weaponized ‘not gunna fight you’ balances things out.
I don’t think you can tolerate it one way and not the other. Many times the only way to defend against Big McFightster or UnChecked EgoBro is going to be removing any satisfaction in having beef with you.
-
Yeah, I don’t think this is about the low xp cafe worker who is in the correct faction.
-
@Juniper Yes. What I’m meaning to point out is that the opposite unsatisfying situation is allowed and common: Murder Bro senselessly ramping up conflict with pacifist who joined the correct faction. Being threatening over petty slights to brand newbies who haven’t even joined a faction yet also happens and is treated IC and all part of the story and we work through it.
I don’t see how those can stand but being manipulative in the way illustrated in a high conflict faction can’t?
Again - if this is all about OOC nattering then fine, I get it and it makes sense. But it does seem like she is targeting the IC action itself in her example, whereas I think it’s a skill issue on McGuffin Holder’s part they can’t think their way through it and have to complain to staff.
-
@Faraday said in Non-toxic PvP:
That’s assuming the flak MH is getting is IC and not OOC. Like it’s fine for PP to ICly grumble about getting beaten up at the danger pit, but they can’t OOCly go around trashing MH’s player for playing in-theme.
In this scenario, PP isn’t grumbling, PP is purposefully taking a loss at the danger pit in order to be able to bring it up IC whenever MH says anything. Not only was the conflict void of excitement, but PP now uses it as ammunition to ICly derail anything MH tries to talk about afterwards.
@howyadoin said in Non-toxic PvP:
Being threatening over petty slights to brand newbies who haven’t even joined a faction yet also happens and is treated IC and all part of the story and we work through it.
Please DM me with what this is about. Conflict should be fun for everyone involved. I’ll look into it.
-
@Jumpscare said in Non-toxic PvP:
…but PP now uses it as ammunition to ICly derail anything MH tries to talk about afterwards.
Okay I think -this- is the actual crux of the issue, then, and I agree it is very not okay.
-
@howyadoin said in Non-toxic PvP:
Okay I think -this- is the actual crux of the issue, then, and I agree it is very not okay.
Why? Isn’t it entirely appropriate that PP would be grumbling (again, ICly) about getting beaten up at the danger pit when all they wanted to do was find a better solution for the mcguffin? Isn’t it an entirely legitimate beef that they have with MH over a clash of IC goals?
It’s being portrayed like MH was somehow baited into something that is now being used agains them, but MH didn’t need to fight PP in the first place. There were a zillion other ways that conflict could have gone. All I see here is MH getting bent out of shape because it didn’t go the way they wanted.
This whole thing, by the way, is emblematic of why I don’t think PVP can ever be done in a constructive way among strangers on the internet. We can’t even agree on what’s appropriate behavior in a purely hypothetical scenario where nobody has any actual skin in the game.
-
@Faraday Here’s what I don’t like when I say pacifists shouldn’t join CvC factions, using the same two characters @Jumpscare made up:
MH: I’ve secured the Staff of Power for our faction. We must be prepared to defend it, because the Winter Hills Clan will kill to claim it for themselves. The war will be long, we must be prepared to defend the Staff with our lives, and unfortunately, we will have to take theirs, as they are willing to give their lives to take it.
PP: Yeah, I joined this faction because I like the color scheme of the faction on my PB. I wasn’t aware this was a CvC faction and have no intent in helping anything ICly.
MH:
-
@Faraday Not really, because PP didn’t HAVE TO get beaten up in the danger pit.
On SH, you can collab offscreen resolution.
Here, PP manipulated MH into an onscreen solution that was theme appropriate for MH, and theme-bendy for PP, that MH wanted to avoid actually. This was not satisfying to MH. (Fine - who cares. I agree this is whatever).
But now PP takes this as some opt-in to a long term, unresolvable grudge which MH actually tried to avoid, that PP uses to shit on anything further MH wants to do that is theme appropriate.
This essentially preys on the OOC empathies of other players which now come into play and start diluting the theme - requiring staff to come in and constantly assure the community that MH is acting in accordance with the theme of Faction X, so please stop DMing each other on discord about what an asshole he is and please stop messaging powerful NPCs to get rid of him.
-
@Faraday said in Non-toxic PvP:
This whole thing, by the way, is emblematic of why I don’t think PVP can ever be done in a constructive way among strangers on the internet.
I mean it’s inherently a YMMV proposition no matter how you work it. Personally, PVP with strangers works fine and constructively for me ¯_(ツ)_/¯ so long as those strangers are opted-in and on the same page about what game we are playing.
-
I’m generally an advocate for broadening the definition of PvP for this reason. On the surface a lot of people will look at the scenario being described as MH being a meanie PvPer, and PP being a collaborative feelgood player. But actually, they are both engaging in PvP. PP is using social tools, MH physical ones.
I think that most of us will agree that it’s good manners for PvP aficionados to be selective about whom they engage in conflict and try not to bother people who don’t wanna be bothered. It’s obviously domineering arsehole behaviour of the geared up military man to challenge a low xp cafe worker to a duel at dawn. But subjecting the military guy just doing his job to moral shaming and social ostracisation after he shoved someone away from a security barrier is also PvP. And if he’s giving signals of, “I don’t really want to fight you, however I will have to per my role if you keep trying to sneak past the barrier” that is an attempt at conflict deescalation; ignoring it, and then socially persecuting him afterwards, is the same type of unsolicited ahole behaviour as trying to start a fight with a low xp cafe worker.
In text, hitting someone isn’t a worse offence than calling them names like it is in the real world. The latter is often a lot more effective at taking a character out of commission (by making them less fun to play).
So, PP is subjecting MH to unsolicited PvP, that’s just as bad as randomly attacking a character in any other way. A lot of bad feelings seem to arise anytime someone is attacked using something other than their weapon of choice, which they may innocuously pretend isn’t a weapon at all when it advantages them.
-
@howyadoin said in Non-toxic PvP:
On SH, you can collab offscreen resolution.
I have no idea what game SH is. I thought we were speaking in generalities. There are certainly places where offscreen resolution isn’t always an option.
@Kestrel said in Non-toxic PvP:
But actually, they are both engaging in PvP. PP is using social tools, MH physical ones.
Oh absolutely. They were both in direct conflict over what should happen with the mcguffin.
@Kestrel said in Non-toxic PvP:
And if he’s giving signals of, “I don’t really want to fight you, however I will have to per my role if you keep trying to sneak past the barrier” that is an attempt at conflict deescalation; ignoring it, and then socially persecuting him afterwards, is the same type of unsolicited ahole behaviour as trying to start a fight with a low xp cafe worker.
I don’t agree. Imagine if PP did fight back, and then lost. I don’t think people would be judging them for then acting pissy (ICly) with MH afterward. There was a conflict and now there’s some IC bad blood. All seems completely expected to me.
I can imagine this exact scenario played out with me and a buddy and it would all be completely fine if we just kept it IC. My PC beat up theirs at the danger pit, then theirs badmouths mine about how things went down, then mine concocts some way to get back at them, etc. etc. Maybe they end up mortal enemies, maybe they find some common ground, who knows. The IC drama itself isn’t the problem, which is why I have a hard time faulting PP in this situation.
