Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Rant about my Party
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7152370" data-attributes="member: 16814"><p>Remedial action is not limited to capitulation or exit, though, else you've justified bullying as something you can ask to have stop, but if they bullies say no, it's now your problem.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I reject this simplified dichotomy, as it is based on a specific outcome goal, namely the end of conflict. But rarely does capitulation actually result in a cessation of conflict -- generally it leads to passive aggressive behavior and the transference of the conflict to other areas.</p><p></p><p>If the initial attempt at compromise fails, it could be for a number of reasons -- your position is unreasonable, their position is unreasonable, or, the far more likely, one or both sides isn't representing the actual causes of the conflict. If you fail to reach a compromise, quitting or quitting is a poor resolution mechanic if you want to actually resolve anything. Instead, direct addressing of underlying reasons and feelings is a more appropriate step, especially in situations as fraught as this one.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I still feel that the OP is being bullied. This needs to be called out and discussed (since the game is online, this is at least physically safe) or the OP needs to absent himself immediately. On this latter point we agree, but not because it's how you resolve conflicts but because you should never continue to submit yourself to abuse. Abuse being a different animal than conflicting points of view in game.</p><p></p><p>I was uncertain if you were using that word as intended -- no offense meant, but I don't know your posting style well and it is the internet; assuming vocabulary skills isn't always warranted. So I hedge in your favor by being explicit. Glad you can confirm.</p><p></p><p>However, that said, I would strongly hesitate to diagnose pathological behavior from the details in the OP. And, if your argument is only for the pathological case, which would hopefully be far more obvious and verging into abuse rather than disagreement, what's your advice for the OP?</p><p></p><p> </p><p>Two things. Firstly, I specifically called out that the group had already acknowledged and approved the choice of class and oath prior to the events in my example. Perhaps you overlooked that. Second, if the group allows your paladin to start play, they've tacitly agreed to the class. If they allow your oath into play, they've tacitly agreed to the oath. If they have no objection to your play of that class and oath up until the conflict, they've tacitly agreed to your play. Complaining that you don't like the class, the oath, and the play only at the point of conflict is a failure of the group to honor the social contract of the game -- the group is now at fault, not the player. The time to complain is beforehand. </p><p></p><p>If something unforeseen emerges, as it can do, then that's a discussion that needs to be had frankly and openly with the whole group, yes. However, the paladin not lying for your convenience certainly is not this case, and, as a group, you've already approved this play prior to the events unfolding. The fault is yours. If you then insist that the player alter their character because you've decided to retroactively remove your permission, the breach of social contract is on you, not the paladin's player. If the group agrees with you, and threatens the character with violence, that's essentially threatening the player with emotional violence and is a bullying tactic. Bullying does not go well with capitulation.</p><p></p><p>This is heavy on blame the victim.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 7152370, member: 16814"] Remedial action is not limited to capitulation or exit, though, else you've justified bullying as something you can ask to have stop, but if they bullies say no, it's now your problem. I reject this simplified dichotomy, as it is based on a specific outcome goal, namely the end of conflict. But rarely does capitulation actually result in a cessation of conflict -- generally it leads to passive aggressive behavior and the transference of the conflict to other areas. If the initial attempt at compromise fails, it could be for a number of reasons -- your position is unreasonable, their position is unreasonable, or, the far more likely, one or both sides isn't representing the actual causes of the conflict. If you fail to reach a compromise, quitting or quitting is a poor resolution mechanic if you want to actually resolve anything. Instead, direct addressing of underlying reasons and feelings is a more appropriate step, especially in situations as fraught as this one. Personally, I still feel that the OP is being bullied. This needs to be called out and discussed (since the game is online, this is at least physically safe) or the OP needs to absent himself immediately. On this latter point we agree, but not because it's how you resolve conflicts but because you should never continue to submit yourself to abuse. Abuse being a different animal than conflicting points of view in game. I was uncertain if you were using that word as intended -- no offense meant, but I don't know your posting style well and it is the internet; assuming vocabulary skills isn't always warranted. So I hedge in your favor by being explicit. Glad you can confirm. However, that said, I would strongly hesitate to diagnose pathological behavior from the details in the OP. And, if your argument is only for the pathological case, which would hopefully be far more obvious and verging into abuse rather than disagreement, what's your advice for the OP? Two things. Firstly, I specifically called out that the group had already acknowledged and approved the choice of class and oath prior to the events in my example. Perhaps you overlooked that. Second, if the group allows your paladin to start play, they've tacitly agreed to the class. If they allow your oath into play, they've tacitly agreed to the oath. If they have no objection to your play of that class and oath up until the conflict, they've tacitly agreed to your play. Complaining that you don't like the class, the oath, and the play only at the point of conflict is a failure of the group to honor the social contract of the game -- the group is now at fault, not the player. The time to complain is beforehand. If something unforeseen emerges, as it can do, then that's a discussion that needs to be had frankly and openly with the whole group, yes. However, the paladin not lying for your convenience certainly is not this case, and, as a group, you've already approved this play prior to the events unfolding. The fault is yours. If you then insist that the player alter their character because you've decided to retroactively remove your permission, the breach of social contract is on you, not the paladin's player. If the group agrees with you, and threatens the character with violence, that's essentially threatening the player with emotional violence and is a bullying tactic. Bullying does not go well with capitulation. This is heavy on blame the victim. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Rant about my Party
Top