Why I'm Posting This Stuff

So, the Godfather council is hoping to see me help lead a good bunch of RPers out in Hollywood.  Since 'rp' means a variety of different things to different people (everything from discussions/debates, newspapers, the stories of our characters' lives) I wanted to get some input from the players (hence why this discussion is here and not in the streets) about what they find entertaining!

To this end, I'm going to post a few different discussion threads. 

This one is about debates but I will do two others, one on stories and the other about newspapers.

Types of Active Posters

To help you understand where I'm coming from in this... my perception (and please do correct me if I'm wrong) is we have a few different types of active posters on the site.

• People who have a lot of time on their hands who enjoy writing stories by themselves and with others about the lives their characters live in the fictional setting of our game.
• People who have less time on their hands, who also enjoy writing stories of their characters' lives, but still want to write.  In some cases, they may feel shy or unsure of how to start doing that or how to connect with writers who they admire.
• People who prefer current events in the game whether that's announcements of auth, protection orders, etc.
• People who like debate and discussions which are designed to welcome input from others.  The most successful of which seems to be verbal sparing, analysis and commentary on recent events and current leadership.  This sort of post allows folks to come and go as they wish and engage as little or as much as they like with no pressure to keep posting if they don't want to.
• People who enjoy popping into posts and posting things to get reactions.  People who greatly enjoy getting a rise out of others to make a point they feel is valid or just for a laugh.

Discussions/Debates ... and the challenges

My aversion to debates comes from these few - we'll call them challenges.

• When someone posts a discussion/debate about things that don't directly pertain to the game (say philosophical questions) these seldom get any real views/responses.
• The topics debated and discussing the game (what makes a good auth, made man ceremony, expectations of leadership, expectations of those ranked above made-man) have been done so often that most of us know how each other already feels about them.
• Those expressing unpopular ideas tend to get ganged up on, sometimes this leads to problems in the community that last well beyond the discussion.  And while that's entertaining for some, the goal of a long-standing and solid community might be better served by creating an environment where people don't feel singled out, bullied or runoff.  As adults, we should be able to disagree without being assholes or taking it too hard, but not everyone possesses that ability.  While it might be easy to tell people who are thinned skinned to fuck off... it doesn't really serve the purpose of helping the community to stay strong and our member numbers to remain high.  

So what makes a good discussion / debate?  Can new life be breathed into discussions and debates?  When the topic of alternatives to stories in the streets comes up it's always debates and discussions that get mentioned and yet few people seem to be starting those - but many claim to be waiting around for people to start good ones... 

Since my crew is charged with making the streets entertaining... I want to hear what you the players of MafiaReturns are really wanting. The streets aren't the place to discuss that. 

So... let's talk.

Discussions and Debates - are they really wanted and needed?  If so how do we go about doing them right?

I’m always up for a debate or a discussion. But I prefer to have them in character and about something meaningful. For example I don’t want to have a debate about the best city, I’d rather have a debate about the future state of the cities etc while role playing a few hands of poker in a local business. 

This is a role playing game and I prefer to respect that. But that being said I’m always open to helping those in the community learn the art of role play if they so desire. I’m not the best role player out there, but it is one of my favourite aspects of the genre. 

The biggest problem with posting in the forums in general is the complete inability of people to distinguish themselves from the characters they are meant to play. Each character is a carbon copy of the latter, which may differ in terms of physical appearance, but absolutely steadfastly maintains the same views as every other character they have ever played. This personal flaw is then further projected onto whomever they see talking, which results in a very boring conversation where Grin is having the same argument he already had a thousand times already, rather than AvardT having it for the first time. I have had two consecutive accounts with entirely contrasting views as broad as "loyalty is everything" and "loyalty is nothing" and some dummy will still link every opinion I've ever posted together like some sort of idiot dot-to-dot. That is what makes debates boring, a complete failure to separate character from player.

Whilst that is a virtually impossible task for you to achieve alone, the game would significantly benefit if users made this separation, dropped the victim mentality and acted to any given situation as how their characters would act. If we could approach a topic with the thought process of "how would a 1930s Wise Guy react to this situation", we would all benefit. This includes accepting prima facie that some people's characters are dicks. They might be rude, they might be mean and they might hurt your feelings. This is fine. You need to again consider whether your character would be offended by what has happened and I suspect in 99% of cases the answer would be no. Make the separation. 

As to what you can do, I would suggest every player does whatever it is they enjoy doing, because this is first and foremost a game to be played for fun. Delving into your mandate, a forced debate about a rehashed topic is rarely enjoyable for author or reader. I try to pick topics about dynamic events such as a war or something someone may be doing because they are typically unique and therefore more likely to be entertaining as they haven't been described before. People also really seemed to get a kick out of my "peak behind the curtain" posts exposing tactics and strategies of regimes as this is an element of the game a lot of people do not usually interact with. Posts providing a new experience for readers would probably go down well and receive responses.

Grin, thanks for your two cents on this topic.  Honestly, I do like your input a ton.  Perhaps it illuminates a larger problem in the community: how players approach the game.  A great discussion topic to be sure. 

I think for some people they treat roleplay in the streets as quite separate from the game of politics/war that happens between players.  Consequently, there is a different feeling to threads that pertain to the game mechanics (such as being made) and threads that explore a character's life. 

For example John Doe might play a gangster who is a rat bastard that would sell his own mother for a dime... but as a player John Doe damn well knows what you do on this run as a character will greatly impact how you're treated on your next run.  So maybe he'd never betray his family.

Now I know what you might be thinking: "People shouldn't hold folks responsible for what they did not past runs.  That was their character and not the player!"

And you'd be right. 

In a game where choices made were the choices of your character (and not the player) it should have no impact on how you are treated the moment that the character dies.  And yet... there are people who (as an example) 'jump ship' on one character who never see the end of some people bitching about it.  There are folks who rogue on 10 different characters and then can't figure out why no one trusts them that they are doing something different on character #11.

It's next to impossible for many people to separate the actions of players from the characters.  Of course, that's because for a large portion of the site, it's just a new nickname for themselves.  They don't participate in developing a story or personality or life for their character (or if they do they never share that in the streets or business districts.

For some players a new character might similar opinions as the last one (because maybe that's what they enjoy playing) and it's impossible to know for sure if someone is just "being themselves with a new nickname" or if they are just playing a character with similar opinions and ideals to the last.  

So long as players all approach the game from a different point of view, and there is no clear instructions on the right way to play/view the game, nothing is likely to change.  The idea of 100% roleplay in the streets will continue to confuse people.  Is it a place where people write stories and if you want to discuss something you need to just avoid using game terms?  Or is a place to show off your character's true stripes and pov that is vastly different from what you know should help you survive long and get far in this game?  

People will be left wondering if they're writing with someone who truly is playing a character or someone who is writing as themselves with another nickname.  And more importantly, they'll worry about how people are going to view what they write - will they hold the player responsible for generations to come, or forget it the moment their character dies.  You will never really know for sure.

So, your points are super valid and really good.  But so long as people hate a player endlessly for the actions of one or more of his characters (constant references to their bloodlines/past actions as if it indicates what they will do on this new run) people will always approach the streets with that in the back of their heads.  As a result, that will continue to impact RP, Discussions/Debates, and newspapers posted there. 

I'm not sure that the problem can be fixed outside of some executive decision being made as to the "right way to play", mass education/re-education for the entire site, enforcement of that opinion maybe via killing people's characters when the players don't seem to hold to it.  However, I really don't see that happening anytime soon.  So this may be a problem we continue to live with and try to workaround.

Just the same, thank you for coming out and putting it into words.  It illustrates a very IMPORTANT point.  Everyone comes to this game in their own way and what you see in the streets isn't the whole story of the person behind the character.

I've written and re-written this response a few times, so I'll try and keep my thoughts brief. I am incredibly partial to good discussion, but I don't think it's a staple of the Streets. It comes and goes based on certain factors. Good discussions originate from an RP mindset, an understanding of the current context of the game, and a willingness to engage in the conflict that comes with good debate. These pieces matter and aren't always there.

For example, while my post-mortem on purging was certainly influenced by me as a player, Javier saw how it ripped through his city. The RP mindset made him furious at the practice, which led to him banning it in Philadelphia. The current context of the game was significant- because players didn't know if purging would return or if it was gone for good. And from the very first thread I wrote, I was willing to engage in the conflict of those conversations and likely die for it. To the credit of my crewleader at the time, she allowed me to continue undeathed even as an associate.

In my opinion, I don't think it's the place of crewleaders to chastise one another in the Streets. If it's manufactured conflict, we're eroding the goodwill between the cities for "RP". If it's a real issue, it should be handled respectfully in private. The council is a great way for these concerns to be resolved without jeopardizing the peace we've brokered.

Similarly, I don't think it's the place of associates to chastise leaders because they haven't really earned the authority to demand a response from a crewleader.

Perhaps the role of the Made Man in the new era could stem from this. They are free to evaluate and prompt crewleaders into discussions about how they operate. So long as they don't openly disrespect the crewleader they want to speak with, I don't see why regular conversations with crewleaders and city heads couldn't become more common. The key distinction I'd say is that crewleaders have no obligation to engage anyone without a button.

If the conversation is in an RP mindset- something that would matter in the 1930s mafia- and addresses some element of the current context of the game, it would make for good conversation. Hand selections, auth selections, big gambling winners and big gambling losers, recruiting practices, and inter-city relationships are all up for grabs. Hell, call me out if every other CL in Philly is a Don before me. That may be something that Javier needs to own up to. There are details and nuances to the current state of the game that no one digs into.

Crewleaders should be an open book now, leading a crew is not a private affair, and Made Men can be the ones parsing the pages in the Streets. Instead of "demanding Street participation" from us, how about the players give us something to participate in. And then judge us on whether we respond or not, how we handle the inquiry, and what we say about ourselves and our operations.

In my opinion, that's how meaningful debates and discussions can return to the Streets in a way that actually improves how we play.

I agree with Javier,

I would love for more CL's than just the council to show their face and ways of handling their operations in the streets. We often talk about people getting another auth again and again. Well perhaps the foundation for that is because they are actually really good at running a family. They are able to arrange, fund and motivate a lively family and people in small circles are the only ones to see that potential and experience it first hand.

Something i would also like to see is associates or mades coming to the streets and sharing their experience, what does it mean for them to be made. How did their family leader and the hands approach him or her differently since then. What is the communication channel and time invested between them and their city leader. 

I think people who are aspiring hands, family leads or city leaders are dying to hear this kind of info. Not global discussions and theorizing about what qualities a 'good leader' has etc.

I am not really sure about this due to being new,but good luck!