W
WizO_Adele
Guest
Background:
The ISRP team has already presented a definitive proposal to remove Juxta as a setting. Juxta will be replaced with the setting selected by a general consensus/vote as outlined in a previous thread.
The other piece of this ISRP area overhaul is fine tuning the Greyhawk/CRT setting. There are two proposals to do as much.
The discussion will have several pieces. The first will be to present each proposal as they stand for discussion and potential modification. The basic proposals are fairly straightforward and ideally complete. A brief amount of time will be given for comments on them, a chance for any revisions to be proposed and discussed, after which a final proposal will be presented and a vote held.
A nay vote would result in the Greyhawk setting staying relatively similar to how it is now. A yay vote would accept the designated proposal (in it's final form), and we would proceed with the additional pieces as outlined before, voting and discussion each one and any additional proposed until we have a complete and well rounded picture of the new setting.
This discussion will last at least one week, with a tentative end date of Saturday June 18th.
So without further ado:
====================================
The Setting Restricted Proposal
The idea in mind was to create one highly flexible, high-magic, high-variety and high-tolerance setting (the Juxta replacement) which would compliment this proposal to further transform the Greyhawk setting into a more experienced, advanced freeform area with character/action restrictions, lower-magic and a generally more enforced and perhaps realistic setting environment for those wishing a more guided role-playing area.
The Skeleton Proposal (Setting Restrictions):
Core proposed restrictions:
No gods or god avatars.
No unaccompanied children under the age of 12 allowed in the Tavern.
No tech beyond fairly simple clockwork. The setting specifically forbids it.
Restrictions on animals; this means barnyard types and wild animals would not be allowed. Weres and specific animal companions, not included.
No non-Staff behind the bar or in the kitchen (Which is behind the bar
)
Characters such as demons, devils, required be 'in disguise' at all times while in the tavern as on Oerth, demonkind and so forth were sent packing some years ago after traumatic wars. They would not ever show themselves openly in public. Demons are simply despised and the Neutral Ground aspect of the Tavern would be no protection for them.
Chronomancy cannot be used to bring future people or items back to the Tavern.
Other/Optional Restrictions:
Drow either be in disguise as the Demons and Devils, or allowed to be themselves *within* the tavern only.
Vampires either be in disguise or otherwise restricted in activities.
Weres be welcome in the Tavern but should be in their humanoid forms shortly after arriving up to just before departing.
Familiars be present only in the company of their masters and under their control.
Dragons be in human or human-like form while in the Tavern.
A fine or tax on the use of dangerous magic openly in the tavern. Such as slinging fireballs and so forth all about.
Limitations on slavery.
Limitations on offworld and/or unique magic.
Anything else proposed
==========================================
Secondary proposal (Open Portals):
Background:
The original CRT, near as I can tell from documentation I have inherited and my personal experiences at the time, was set in Greyhawk. The Tavern was blessed/cursed with a door that was truly a portal, opening to any time and any place at random. Guests who found themselves there could return home through another portal door. This allowed a wide variety of characters from any setting or genre to find their way to the Tavern. Now this is considerably more accomodating than the current setting in that literally any character could arrive in the tavern, including Jedi Knights, Cavemen, Cyborgs and Modern Day characters.
The Proposal
To return the CRT to it's roots. CRT would remain set in the realm of Greyhawk that it currently resides. The portal doors would re-activate and that area of Greyhawk would find itself experiencing an influx of new and strange people. Siani, as an accomodating tavern owner, would agree that these visitors would be able to make use of her Tavern and it's surrounding grounds on the terms that they obeyed her simple tavern rules, and did not interfere in the surrounding countryside. Visitors leaving the Tavern grounds would be subject to extreme hostility and quarantine from local law enforcement, and Siani would not guarantee their safety or acceptance, nor would she be liable for any personal or physical property damage incurred as a result. Visitors refusing to accept the simple tavern rules may find themselves hocked back through the portal they came (to what degree enforced to be determined by the options below - under Overall Summary).
=========================================
Query: How do we uphold setting restrictions without getting terribly complicated.
Suggestion: A non CoC variation of Room Disruption; we might refer to it as Setting Disruption. It would carry the same Three Strikes as any CoC warning, but in this case, the *character*, not the player, would wind up barred from the room. Please remember this would not be a disciplinary action, but a role-playing restriction. However, any player that displays intentional disregard for the Setting with the intent of inciting Room Disruption would be subject to the CoC category of Room Disruption and may receive a subsequent CoC based official warning and/or CoC discipline for their disruptive actions.. We don't want to penalize a *player* for Setting Disruption unless forced by that player to do so. Generally speaking, we would work on the philosophy that everyone has a right to be there and understands the Setting and Room guidelines until they prove otherwise past the point of doubt.
Additional discussion point to consider: Should patrons be able to be significant people in the setting? That is, major members of the Town and so on. Can they work for the Tavern in some way? Guidelines may be created to assist this. Examples to consider would be: no official CoC warnings against the username, passed a Setting quiz, has 0-1 setting based disruption warnings. Also, priviliges could be revoked based on receiving either Setting Disruption warnings/reminders or Official CoC warnings/reminders as deemed appropriate. Significant characters could likewise be limited to non-law enforcement or other specific character types to prevent specific abuse concerns.
=========================================
Overall Summary of how a vote might look:
Option A: Leave Greyhawk as it is.
Option B: Accept the Setting Restricted proposal (with mini-votes to determine which restrictions are set)
Option C: Accept the Open Portals proposal
Option D: Accept the Open Portals proposal and several restrictions to characters/actions ( mini-votes to determine which restrictions are set. Examples of suggested restrictions would include children and animal limitations.)
The ISRP team has already presented a definitive proposal to remove Juxta as a setting. Juxta will be replaced with the setting selected by a general consensus/vote as outlined in a previous thread.
The other piece of this ISRP area overhaul is fine tuning the Greyhawk/CRT setting. There are two proposals to do as much.
The discussion will have several pieces. The first will be to present each proposal as they stand for discussion and potential modification. The basic proposals are fairly straightforward and ideally complete. A brief amount of time will be given for comments on them, a chance for any revisions to be proposed and discussed, after which a final proposal will be presented and a vote held.
A nay vote would result in the Greyhawk setting staying relatively similar to how it is now. A yay vote would accept the designated proposal (in it's final form), and we would proceed with the additional pieces as outlined before, voting and discussion each one and any additional proposed until we have a complete and well rounded picture of the new setting.
This discussion will last at least one week, with a tentative end date of Saturday June 18th.
So without further ado:
====================================
The Setting Restricted Proposal
The idea in mind was to create one highly flexible, high-magic, high-variety and high-tolerance setting (the Juxta replacement) which would compliment this proposal to further transform the Greyhawk setting into a more experienced, advanced freeform area with character/action restrictions, lower-magic and a generally more enforced and perhaps realistic setting environment for those wishing a more guided role-playing area.
The Skeleton Proposal (Setting Restrictions):
Core proposed restrictions:
No gods or god avatars.
No unaccompanied children under the age of 12 allowed in the Tavern.
No tech beyond fairly simple clockwork. The setting specifically forbids it.
Restrictions on animals; this means barnyard types and wild animals would not be allowed. Weres and specific animal companions, not included.
No non-Staff behind the bar or in the kitchen (Which is behind the bar
)Characters such as demons, devils, required be 'in disguise' at all times while in the tavern as on Oerth, demonkind and so forth were sent packing some years ago after traumatic wars. They would not ever show themselves openly in public. Demons are simply despised and the Neutral Ground aspect of the Tavern would be no protection for them.
Chronomancy cannot be used to bring future people or items back to the Tavern.
Other/Optional Restrictions:
Drow either be in disguise as the Demons and Devils, or allowed to be themselves *within* the tavern only.
Vampires either be in disguise or otherwise restricted in activities.
Weres be welcome in the Tavern but should be in their humanoid forms shortly after arriving up to just before departing.
Familiars be present only in the company of their masters and under their control.
Dragons be in human or human-like form while in the Tavern.
A fine or tax on the use of dangerous magic openly in the tavern. Such as slinging fireballs and so forth all about.
Limitations on slavery.
Limitations on offworld and/or unique magic.
Anything else proposed
==========================================
Secondary proposal (Open Portals):
Background:
The original CRT, near as I can tell from documentation I have inherited and my personal experiences at the time, was set in Greyhawk. The Tavern was blessed/cursed with a door that was truly a portal, opening to any time and any place at random. Guests who found themselves there could return home through another portal door. This allowed a wide variety of characters from any setting or genre to find their way to the Tavern. Now this is considerably more accomodating than the current setting in that literally any character could arrive in the tavern, including Jedi Knights, Cavemen, Cyborgs and Modern Day characters.
The Proposal
To return the CRT to it's roots. CRT would remain set in the realm of Greyhawk that it currently resides. The portal doors would re-activate and that area of Greyhawk would find itself experiencing an influx of new and strange people. Siani, as an accomodating tavern owner, would agree that these visitors would be able to make use of her Tavern and it's surrounding grounds on the terms that they obeyed her simple tavern rules, and did not interfere in the surrounding countryside. Visitors leaving the Tavern grounds would be subject to extreme hostility and quarantine from local law enforcement, and Siani would not guarantee their safety or acceptance, nor would she be liable for any personal or physical property damage incurred as a result. Visitors refusing to accept the simple tavern rules may find themselves hocked back through the portal they came (to what degree enforced to be determined by the options below - under Overall Summary).
=========================================
Query: How do we uphold setting restrictions without getting terribly complicated.
Suggestion: A non CoC variation of Room Disruption; we might refer to it as Setting Disruption. It would carry the same Three Strikes as any CoC warning, but in this case, the *character*, not the player, would wind up barred from the room. Please remember this would not be a disciplinary action, but a role-playing restriction. However, any player that displays intentional disregard for the Setting with the intent of inciting Room Disruption would be subject to the CoC category of Room Disruption and may receive a subsequent CoC based official warning and/or CoC discipline for their disruptive actions.. We don't want to penalize a *player* for Setting Disruption unless forced by that player to do so. Generally speaking, we would work on the philosophy that everyone has a right to be there and understands the Setting and Room guidelines until they prove otherwise past the point of doubt.
Additional discussion point to consider: Should patrons be able to be significant people in the setting? That is, major members of the Town and so on. Can they work for the Tavern in some way? Guidelines may be created to assist this. Examples to consider would be: no official CoC warnings against the username, passed a Setting quiz, has 0-1 setting based disruption warnings. Also, priviliges could be revoked based on receiving either Setting Disruption warnings/reminders or Official CoC warnings/reminders as deemed appropriate. Significant characters could likewise be limited to non-law enforcement or other specific character types to prevent specific abuse concerns.
=========================================
Overall Summary of how a vote might look:
Option A: Leave Greyhawk as it is.
Option B: Accept the Setting Restricted proposal (with mini-votes to determine which restrictions are set)
Option C: Accept the Open Portals proposal
Option D: Accept the Open Portals proposal and several restrictions to characters/actions ( mini-votes to determine which restrictions are set. Examples of suggested restrictions would include children and animal limitations.)
