Concerning the creation of 2k2 roleplaying history.

[Aestus]

I contacted Stefan about this same idea, but I have received no response — indeed, he did not bother to even read the second part of the proposal.

I cannot stress enough the importance of a widely accepted and enforced set of roleplaying guidelines and histories. Without them, 2k2 will quickly degenerate into a roleplaying atmosphere no better than 2k1, with players continuing to invent their own set of gods, locations, ages, etc. This makes for a less than desirable roleplaying atmosphere, and leads to confusing, and usually lackluster roleplaying. Obviously, detailed roleplaying guidelines cannot be created until play mechanics are fully understood, but a roleplaying history of the world can be easily and quickly created by any number of players.

What I fear is that people will confuse a roleplaying history with an official storyline needed to be incorporated into the game itself. This is not the case. A roleplaying history will simply set the stage for the events to come. It is a guideline at best, something for roleplayers to base their actions, words, and characters off of. It lays out a timeline of events in the islands’ past, of geographical locations, it lays out a list of important deities and historical figures. It is a set of rules and restrictions, binding all players to one story which can be understood equally by all. And while it is not the same as the Roleplaying Guidelines in that is does not lay out clearly a defined set of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors, it will still serve to regulate character development, to prevent players from creating character histories that would contradict that of another. For example, a player could not include in his story that his parents were killed in a war that is not mentioned in the timeline.

However, it is important to not fear you will be suffocated by the history’s restrictions. You are, of course, limited, but not completely. Players are free to invent their own minor locations and events, so long as they do not in any way contradict the history created by the players --- while you could not create an entirely new city for your own purposes, no one would protest a woodsman’s shack in the forest burned to the ground by a rogue sorcerer. Common sense should be administered in cases like these, and in instances of ambiguity, it would be up to the roleplaying community to make the final decision.

The type of roleplaying history described above would be created by a small council of prominent and accomplished rolepayers, with all drafts posted for the public’s view on the forums, where they would be revised by the entire roleplaying community, and anyone who wishes to put forth an opinion. This is because a document like that described above will function only with the cooperation of the entire roleplaying. It must be embraced, accepted and enforced by all, or it will fail. The final history should be accepted by a majority vote of the roleplaying community.

Thoughts?