rpanons | Nobody flicks me in the butt without my consent

Nobody flicks me in the butt without my consent

Rundown:

rpanons is an anonymous community for role-play related topics. This place serves as a forum for game discussions, canon discussions, RP solicitations (ATP, game ads, open memes), and advice. The occasional off topic comment is inevitable, but please keep heated social and political topics to their respective communities. Posting them here will only get them frozen. Subsequent threads made to bypass a freeze will then be deleted.

Rules:

Do not post pornographic or shocking images.
Do not share private entries, plurks, chat logs, etc.
Do not use this community as your social/political/hatespeech soapbox.
Do not be redundant. One page does not need three or more threads on one topic/theme.
Do not treat this comm like your personal Plurk or Twitter. Off-topic happens, but it should be open for discussion and not just a play-by-play of your life. No one cares.

CONCERNS | RESOURCES

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I didn't want Link to be morally ambiguous, I wanted him to learn that there is moral ambiguity.

What? Are you trying to say the situation in Amat is morally ambiguous? Even though we're all screaming about how it's obviously not ambiguous? It's very clear who's suffering here vs. who's the power-hungry crazed overlord?

I can't even believe you.

OOCly, the situation is not morally ambiguous. In game, there are many characters who are fine with the situation, others who are vehemently not, and those who are in a middle ground. And there is the Native population who see this whole thing as fine because their loving goddess has told them it is.

There are enough sides to this that a character coming into it can find quite a bit of moral ambiguity among the other PCs as much as they can in the set dressing itself. Particularly when there are long, long stretches of happy-go-lucky slice of life interrupted by curses that more than a few characters are now very 'meh' about and don't outwardly treat like they're any big deal. Every curse there's at least one post of "oh, is it curse time again? joy. Well, once you're done doing whatever come on down and have a bite to eat!"

Except the natives weren't wearing collars and thus not suffering like the collared people were.

That's like saying "hey, the Redead are fine with the destroyed Hyrule! This situation must be morally ambiguous then!"

No. No. No.

I thought it was more like "The Gerudo are fine with Ganondorf being a tyrant and ruling a destroyed Hyrule! This situation must be morally ambiguous then!" YMMV

You just proved my point.

Everybody avoided the Gerudo like the plague. They were considered thieves and tyrants themselves.

And here you're going to throw out "Where Link joined them--"

No. He did not start mugging people. He did not "join" them per say, as much as they claim they recruited him. He released their hostages, kicked their asses, and got what he needed from them to continue his mission - to stop Ganondorf. He did not embrace them, their ideals, and their opinion of Ganondorf did not change his.

Everyone didn't avoid the Gerudo. The Gerudo actively went out and got boyfriends from Castle Town. A whole group of carpenters went off to try and join them (and then got jailed). But he didn't act against them or think they were bad people by proxy and from all in game dialogue they treated him like he was a friend after he got a membership card. There's no indication he simply ignored them or thought less of them for their allegiance.

You are officially insane. I'm done here.

you do realize how hard you just cherry-picked that feedback just so you could justify yourself, right? and yet you claim in another thread that's not what you're trying to do. and you wonder why people aren't giving you feedback.

the point the anon clearly made is that Link did not start acting out the ways of thieves and tyrants and he didn't support Ganondorf after encountering them either.

he listened, sure, but he still released their prisoners and fought them initially. he also didn't change his opinion of Ganondorf which was very clear given the actions of the rest of the game.

meaning Link could think the amat natives were friends (which a lot of people do), but that doesn't mean their leader suddenly becomes good in his eyes. and he wouldn't necessarily embrace their laws either, unless they were fair (he apparently didn't think imprisonment for "trespassing" was fair in the game, either that or his end goal was way more important to him - which is another thing to consider. Link might break the laws of people he deems unjust to reach the end goal of fighting the big bad)

Sorry, you're right. I did cherry pick the things to correct about that because it was implying that Link didn't think well of the Gerudo in general and was only there to use them and leave them once he got what he wanted and that no one liked them at all. There's nothing to imply Link did not treat them just the same as he did any friends he makes after he got the Carpenters out and things were back to being okay with the world. I had a Zelda fan moment and derailed myself. I apologize.

The point I wast trying to make when I brought up the Gerudo was that the Natives of Atia being okay with the situation are not equal to "the ReDeads being happy with everyone being dead" as the person who responded to me said - they're more akin to the Gerudo being okay with Ganondorf's rule because they had no personal reason not to be. Treating the natives like they don't exist or don't matter just because they aren't PCs to be actively played against is not something I do when a character is ICy prone to going up to pretty much everyone and saying hello and talking to them. Link is going to treat them as friends to be made and listen to them and try to help them as much as he tries to help other PCs.

I think it should be taken into account for how morally ambiguous the setting is on that IC level. It's a factor to consider when coming into the game and developing first IC impressions. Nothing more.

you realize the point of my post, and the other anon's post, that is even if you do make the comparison to the Gerudo why that still doesn't work, right

i just said Link could be friends with them but he wouldn't suddenly accept their leader like Link has. Link didn't become more understanding of Ganondorf just because of his friendship with the Gerudo (if he even established one, which I don't agree that he did)

Link also didn't change his behaviors based on his interactions with them. he remained true to himself.

why am i bothering to repeat myself? you seriously aren't listening. the point is, Link is not morally ambiguous. Amat isn't morally ambiguous either, even on the IC setting. Link would be able to see the injustices there, just like he saw them in the Gerudo when he released the prisoners and continued on his mission to defeat Ganondorf.

I believe the setting is more ambiguous on an IC level. For that I will have to continue to disagree.

But I will do my best to get Link back on the righteous path as quickly as possible without ignoring what's already been done. My time is constrained by my NPC duties this event and will be largely sitting out on an IC level with my characters, but once time opens up in June, I'll focus on closing this story arc so he's back to being the hero he should be.

Thank you for speaking with me.

yes, fuck-or-die, rape, death and suffering is so ambiguous. sure. ok. a HERO who wields the TRIFORCE OF COURAGE would never be able to tell that any of that is wrong. clearly. he only specifically battles against blatant evils over the span of several games, but clearly none of the things about amat that i've listed are "blatant". they're very subtle. that's why everyone is a huge fan of Atia.

except even canon villains know which end is up. it's just Link who apparently doesn't. because he's completely stupid, right?

are you even human? get off it. you're like a parody of yourself at this point.

The cause is ambiguous, not the actions. This was my point with bringing up Majora's Mask. The actions were all bad and Link opposed them, but the cause - Skull Kid - was highly ambiguous in how he was spoken of verses how he was presented and displayed. Link kept being told that 'no, he's actually just misunderstood and misguided, not evil' while everything the Skull Kid did screamed 'no, really, he's really fucking evil'. The Skull Kid ended up proving he wasn't evil and it was another, very evil, outside source influencing him.

What has been presented to Link has been more of a mix than a reverse of that. Atia does both good and evil things and there are people telling him that she's not so bad while others are screaming she's completely evil while Atia herself is asking for understanding. I have taken the stance that Link took away a lesson from the events of MM and that he couldn't just judge someone as outright evil because they did evil actions - that there may be a reason or cause behind that. This opened the door for him to be manipulated past his first month on the island, and he was.

Clearly, you and others believe I was wrong to do that at all. I will work to fix the issue and play him better going forward.

and people have already explained why your skull kid theory doesn't work, so i'm not sure why you're even bringing it up again. link still went after him to stop him and fixed the problems he caused, he didn't defend him or embrace him. only the fairies did. then you claimed you wanted to do that to link without the fairies influence - which is OOC. it's OOC. do you not get it's OOC for Link to behave that way but it was IC for the fairies? Link is not the fairies. you took liberties to explore something which was OOC.

because, frankly, even if Link did think there was a "cause" behind it, like Atia was being manipulated, he would still need to plow forward and try to stop her and help everyone in the process. he wouldn't just stick up for her. and as other anons have mentioned, he said some pretty disgusting OOC things while in defense of her. in short: you did it wrong for a hero. maybe right for a conflicted character, but wrong for Link.

do you get it yet?

then work on it and stop replying. everybody at this point is beyond done with you. it's especially shitty because you're a mod. you used this venue as your personal HMD and i guess you got what you wanted, but everybody else is annoyed as fuck with you.

This will be my last response and only for one thing.

No one was bringing it to my HMD, anon. Two years in Amat and no one brought it to me despite some of you being very clearly invested in seeing him played right. It's just as annoying and frustrating for me that this is the only way I can apparently get anyone to bring up the issues they have with how I've played him when I've only ever asked for people to be honest with him on it. I am happy to get crit and as equally frustrated that it took this to get any. My frustration with that has come out in many of my responses.

For letting that frustration get to me like it has, I apologize.

I will bow out now.

Edited 2013-05-07 04:21 (UTC)

yeah except now your whiteknight is riding in and calling everyone "puerile" and "how dare us" and "we should be ashamed" even though you sound oh-so-grateful for the feedback.

thanks a lot. really.

maybe you should tell them to shut the hell up because that attitude also doesn't encourage any feedback either.

It shouldn't matter where crit is coming from if it's valid, whether that be a wank comm on amat's official HMD. You wanted it? Look, this thread is full of beautiful crit, which you shot down like a thanksgiving turkey. I find it hard to believe you're old enough to even play in Amat if this is your idea of maturely handling a situation.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Nobody flicks me in the butt without my consent

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject