Backstory Guidelines & Policy

If the topic doesn't fit anywhere else, discuss it here.
tulpa
Posts: 118
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2021 5:00 am

Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by tulpa »

I am honestly embarrassed that I have any cause at all to make this thread, but I do want to check a couple of things regarding the new policy statement on backstories.
'Characters with backstory conditions resulting in significant functional impairment (physical or mental) are not allowed.'
I know disability in one very specific case has been discussed at some length in another thread, but I do worry about where you draw the line on this. In the practical sense, this is in relation to one of my own characters, who sometimes hints at a past trauma and some mental health issues, so I need to know what changes should be made if any. Lately I find myself questioning the wisdom of some of my decisions with this character, but I do hope GMs and other players would reach out if there was a problem with the way they are portrayed. I haven't felt that they should require content warnings so far, but I absolutely do not want to cause any offense or harm and will readily retire them if need be.

I confess the concept of a world devoid of disabled people is an uncomfortable one (even if it is just player characters), but I think understand the reasoning behind that, from a moderator's perspective, and in the interests of circumspection.

The second thing I wanted to check is a bit less loaded! What would you consider an historical event? One that would go down in a chronicle or has been mentioned in the lore (e.g. the signing of a treaty, or an exodus)?
Frisbee
Posts: 220
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2022 7:33 am
Location: Greece

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Frisbee »

Hello!

Reading this new policy, and especially the bit quoted in the original post, I do have one similar question that might concern quite a lot of characters. Though I wasn't involved in the creation of backstories including this, I'm certain that mutism is a pretty severe case of physical impairment, whatever the causes of it might be. Given that it's a relatively easy condition to integrate into RP in this particular game, I'm not surprised a few people have experimented with it, but I was wondering how the new, extra-specific rules are going to affect that going forward.

Thank you!
Stop putting watermellons into the first thing you see that looks like it can hold a watermellon. It is most rude, because you'll only make them feel like they don't belong.
Ephemeralis
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2020 10:29 am

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Ephemeralis »

I understand what I think to be the general "airs" of this policy inclusion, but what is considered "significant functional impairment" from a mental perspective? Severe psychopathy? Delusions of grandeur? High levels of narcissism? Overattachment or dependency? The gamut for many common storytelling tropes veers into classifications that could very well fit within the lens of "significant functional impairment". Obviously, I don't think the intent with this is to say that you can only play well-adjusted, neurotypical characters, but it can certainly be read that way at a glance.
Gorth
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:53 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Gorth »

It's been a sort of culture-shock of mine that so many people like playing non-optimal people ala mental illnesses and similar that aren't just psychopathy because EDGE! But it is there. I think this part of the policy should be taken as a guideline, because if we read it as written, it becomes a battle of "where's the line?" Is it lax? Allowing Psychopathy, mutism, various levels of vision impairments? Or is it harsh, not allowing any of that, or people with heavy, dehibilitating injuries, limps, memory loss, quirks of the mind as a result of some minor or major trauma? I think this needs to be worded better to be more of a 'Use your comment sense' type thing, maybe offering examples of what is and isn't alright if we want to be specific, and make sure people know to use their common sense.
:undm_scales_key: :shagerd:
Proud owner of the ten thousandth post.
User avatar
Rias
DEV
Posts: 2024
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:06 pm
Location: Wandering Temicotli

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Rias »

Just to be clear since it was brought up: the intent of the policy isn't to deny the existence of people with significant conditions, but rather to avoid an environment where people are pretending to have serious conditions as what boils down to a character gimmick. The latter part of that sentence may feel unfair or hurtful or offensive to some who have invested in their characters with said conditions, but consider the perspective of people with real conditions IRL or those who care for people with them, seeing what they have to deal with on a daily basis being used as a gimmick by someone who can just walk away from it whenever they wish. I'm by no means saying every player who has a character with such conditions is doing so lightly or offensively - most have been very careful to try and be as tasteful about it as possible. Staff has discussed the matter at length as a team and decided it was best to simply make a policy about it, as it has been a consistent (even if not necessarily constant) issue brought to staff attention.

Representation is important. It is often achieved in other media by people with direct personal experience writing portrayals based on that experience, or by consulting with experts. COGG is, and MUDs in general are, a more live and spontaneous medium which makes careful and thoughtful portrayal more difficult as there is no review or editing process.

The policy avoids giving a specific list of disallowed conditions in order to prevent lawyering, such as invocation of the Air Bud Defense ("There's no specific written rule that says a dog -can't- play on our basketball team"). As an initial test of policy applicability I'd suggest asking oneself the following questions:

- Will this involuntary physical/mental condition require the character to forego any game mechanics that are normally available to all?
- Will this involuntary physical/mental condition require the player to invent explanations or RP workarounds for why the character is able to do certain things in the game that make it difficult to believe, hand-waving away some implemented game mechanics and/or messaging?
- Would this involuntary physical/mental condition ideally have some mechanical considerations or skill/roll adjustments attached to it to make it feel suitably believable, and not be something that can simply be ignored by the player when inconvenient or nobody else is around to see?

And as always, I'll give the advice that if one is seriously debating whether a policy applies or not, it's probably best to err on the side of caution.

As much as we're trying to avoid drawing specific lines in the sand, voluntary versus involuntary is, I think, a pretty good general one to have. It's also more of a blurry zigzag than a line.

Regarding "mutism": Rarely speaking due to various circumstances - anxiety, throat injury, general annoyance/cynicism regarding all of humanity, experienced a harrowing moment and need some time to get through it - seems fine? Claiming it is literally impossible for a character to speak, on the other hand, would require several mechanical considerations in a wide variety of systems in the game, putting it firmly on the wrong side of the guideline about whether the condition would require mechanical considerations.

Things like a stutter, or a verbal or physical muscle tic, seem okay so long as one doesn't go over the top with it. In the case of the latter, staff may ask the player to tone it down. (We can't think of anyone currently that would need to be approached about this.) Also please be considerate of other players if they bring up the situation.

P.S. In the interest of transparency, this post is not completely my own. I have consulted and discussed heavily with the rest of COGG staff and a few individuals outside COGG who have added their own thoughts, considerations, tweaks, and refinements. I am by no stretch of the word one of the aforementioned representation experts, and this is territory that I'm trying my best to be sensitive to but I am not particularly experienced with. Thank you for your patience and understanding, both players and my fellow COGG project staff members! The policy should absolutely be considered official policy, but it may well receive further updates or changes as we consider things further or new issues or perspectives are brought to our attention.
<Rias> PUT ON PANTS
<Fellborn> NO
Tessa
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2022 12:25 pm
Location: Frolicking in the ocean

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Tessa »

I must admit that reading this has felt like a blow to my confidence in playing my character. I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong or doing disability justice, but as someone who lives with multiple disabilities, representation and allowing it does really matter. Have there been NPCs who told my character to speak to a mummer to magically fix her disability? You bet. But I try to separate because I'd honestly would have rather tore into that NPC than try to remain calm for the sake of not being deterred. All this being said, I do not know where I stand and the idea of Kordelia posing such an uncomfortable threat makes me sad.
"The sea is emotion incarnate. It loves, hates, and weeps. It defies all attempts to capture it with words and rejects all shackles. No matter what you say about it, there is always that which you can't." — Christopher Paolini
Ephemeralis
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2020 10:29 am

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Ephemeralis »

The interesting byproduct of this policy is that you are now no longer allowed to play pacifist chars.
artus
Posts: 226
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2021 7:43 am

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by artus »

Gorth wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 5:56 am It's been a sort of culture-shock of mine that so many people like playing non-optimal people ala mental illnesses and similar that aren't just psychopathy because EDGE! But it is there. I think this part of the policy should be taken as a guideline, because if we read it as written, it becomes a battle of "where's the line?" Is it lax? Allowing Psychopathy, mutism, various levels of vision impairments? Or is it harsh, not allowing any of that, or people with heavy, dehibilitating injuries, limps, memory loss, quirks of the mind as a result of some minor or major trauma? I think this needs to be worded better to be more of a 'Use your comment sense' type thing, maybe offering examples of what is and isn't alright if we want to be specific, and make sure people know to use their common sense.
The next question that can potentially arise if people are to count common sense into this whole matter is the definition of it, imo. Sometimes, what defines as common sense for someone or some community may not be in others. We're from all walks of life all over the world. It may not be ideal to assume it on common sense alone. I think it needs more elaboration, if anything.

It seems half of the player population at least may as well be affected by this entire new policy. Some may be easier than retcon more than others, while some may be a struggle. There are loads of mutes on the mud, for example, or someone with barely functional bodyparts etc, if I remember correctly. And that doesn't even count those with super weird backstory that need major rework, all of which previously said can end up awkward for the players or being weird to the rp with abrupt or gradual change that need to be made to accommodate it. Some of the characters and ideas are thoughtfully put together with mechanical consideration in mind so to not break anything, but it eventually ends up breaking something else when it does break. I hope people are kind and supportive toward those who have to go through this period of difficulty, heavy RP anxiety and awkwardness. It's not hard only on the character but also the players, some of whom feel for their characters as much as themselves or their own kin, some of whom consider their characters to be their own or themselves as much as they are ooc. I don't know how easy it is for people to retire a character where they don't fit if retcon doesn't work, but I hope it does not come to the point of retirement at all in not most but all cases. I love everyone with and without quirks and flaws and would still love to see them around, or speaking personally, play them, in a way that's smoother, more acceptable in the community without ending up breaking the lore or being a potential offense/trigger/whatever to anyone. It's a really gray area, admittedly, but I can't deny its legitimate reason of existence and even thankful for the gm team to bring the case forward. I just wish it wasn't after everyone made weird characters. Then again, I have no idea how many people made weird characters early on in the mud that they still play now.
User avatar
Lexx416
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:14 pm

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Lexx416 »

Ephemeralis wrote: Wed Mar 08, 2023 10:25 am The interesting byproduct of this policy is that you are now no longer allowed to play pacifist chars.
I'm not entirely sure how this policy restricts someone from playing a character that's opposed to war/violence/etc.?
"You hear the Woses, the Wild Men of the Woods... Remnants of an older time they be, living few and secretly, wild and wary as beasts."
Gorth
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2021 11:53 am
Location: Michigan

Re: Backstory Guidelines & Policy

Post by Gorth »

This is what happens when things like this happen. Tessa, you're doing nothing wrong and if you are (which you're not) I'd hope someone who actually cares would tell you specifically, and then you could react acordingly. Of course, it's not good to make someone feel bad about things they can't control like disabilities, but I am in the camp that it is fine as long as you're not walking around with your tongue hanging out going 'Hey look at this retarded character I made!'

The point of that is, I'm not disputing the policy. I think it's mostly elegant, and will, likely as not, solve any problems that may have or may arise. It's the Lost Lands. We're all messed up in one way or another, and I think it's a good shot to say that at least fifty percent of the PC population has something deliberately wrong with them, from simple ticks to being a homicidal maniac. I like to make these issues in my characters, and I like to see people do it. Unfortunately, now that all of this has been raised to public eyeline, it will all have an edge to it. There will be people who are simply unwilling to play or play with such characters because they do not want the risk of being on the wrong side of a policy.

Again, it is what it is. Better late than never, but better originally than late. The world will go on, but I think the best course of action is that as long as you're not violating the policy, which mute characters like Kordelia or similar mostly are not, then you're fine, Yeah? Don't beat yourself up about your decisions in an RP game for fun. Trust me, I've done it to myself plenty. If someone complains to you, talk to them. Talk to us, even. We're all chill. The world will go on, and you'll end up with a solution.
:undm_scales_key: :shagerd:
Proud owner of the ten thousandth post.
Post Reply