April Exceptional Story: The Seven-Day Reign

[trodgmey]

I haven’t read the whole thread yet, but I found this exceptional story really frustrating.

For starters, it’s blindingly obvious before the story ever begins that the Stags are a lot that are at best a cesspot of backslapping insufferable cretins, so the notion that either Trodgmey or his adopted daughter would go into this with some presumption of good will on their part is laughable, but it was terribly hard to do anything but. Secondly, she’s Trodgmey’s adopted daughter, and he didn’t adopt her because she was a blind idiot. She would have snuffed out the mess before he would have, not plodded along blindly, needing my help all the time. So the shackles that the story puts on the character are pretty frustrating. I realize that because of continuity constraints, I can’t very well end the story having burned down the Young Stags’ hideouts, ruined the political careers of a third of them, left a third of them with permanent but amusing scars on their faces, and dumped the final third unconscious into the hold of a tramp steamer bound for Polythreme, but that seemed a far more likely ending than the rather meandering one that it got.

The &quotchase scene&quot was also frustrating – I spent a fair bit of time doing various bits of mischief in the first part of the story, but was left with pretty poor chances to impede the chase. It also felt as though I got punished for not overturning the cauldron, and while I can’t expect the mechanics of an exceptional story to take into account the whole world of the Neath, given the amount of grinding I’ve done on the Shrine of the Deep Blue Heaven loop, Trodgmey has probably spent about as much time poking around the Forgotten Quarter as any other single location, but here he is bumping along because of some inane stat developed in the story wasn’t high enough.

All in all, though, I was excited for some extra content with the adopted daughter, whom I realize as a character produced by a fate-locked story can’t be expected to have a lot of content. Still, she remains a terribly underdeveloped character, and one I wish I had more of. Of course I trusted her to take care of the Patriarch on her own – I taught her everything I know, and she knew quite a bit before I met her. I would have thought the bit about the &quotgleam in her eye&quot meant that I was going to assist her in some other more subtle way, but instead I end up just watching? And then I dump her off on a constable because I’m off to investigate what happens to the Stags, but can’t find any more content than my daughter dropping by for tea, and there’s barely anything said?

No, this won’t do. I’m not in Fallen London to have to choose between being a hapless moron and a rampaging fool. As others, I loved the art for it, loved the potential for the story, and enjoyed much of the side content in the first half, but the whole second half was a matter of knowing exactly what was going to happen but given no decent options to do much or even learn much about it.

Meh.

[kukapetal]

@Trodgmey

For starters, it’s blindingly obvious before the story ever begins that the Stags are a lot that are at best a cesspot of backslapping insufferable cretins

Which still made them far nicer than most of the groups in Fallen London…and nicer than your &quotdaughter&quot as well.

Still not understanding the hate.

[trodgmey]

@Kukapetal

[quote=Trodgmey ]For starters, it’s blindingly obvious before the story ever begins that the Stags are a lot that are at best a cesspot of backslapping insufferable cretins

Which still made them far nicer than most of the groups in Fallen London…and nicer than your &quotdaughter&quot as well.

Still not understanding the hate.[/quote]

It’s not hate. It’s being forced to play in a way that forces both myself and the adopted daughter to act like clueless fools. It was a very good set-up for a story, but frustrating play-through.

[frederickmetzengerst]

So… seriously, is the journal issue fixed yet? Is it being fixed? I want to play this story!

[sarahysaro]

Last I heard the issue has been reported and they were planning on fixing it. Not sure if the problem is totally solved yet, but at the very least it’s being addressed at some point.

edited by Sara Hysaro on 4/10/2016

[fairweather]

I can confirm the journal bug is still there. I finished this off in the last hour and had various times I couldn’t save to the journal.

[kirr]

Very good writing and I enjoyed the more Wodehousian parts of it. Ever since I joined in December, though, I have to say I’m not entirely comfortable with the way Exceptional Friendship stories seem to be much more slanted to cannabalism and gore than the rest of the game. (Flint is an exception, I’m thinking of the Art of Murder onwards). It feels like the plots are leaning heavily on ‘everything must have a gory secret at its heart’, and to be honest I’m not really here for the gory secrets. I’ve always had an affection for Fallen London’s humour and the way it ultimately revolved around love.

Not to rip on this month’s story, though, which was well written and had some very funny moments. I was just somewhat hoping we had just dealt with the sanguinary trilogy, and that ‘Family Ties’ would be more like Frequently Deceased.

[professorstrix]

Having finished the story, my thoughts on it were mostly this (beware, spoilers):

I went with this &quotadvisor&quot thing just because I was having a slow week and I’m curious to a fault. Yet, all having been said and done, I still don’t know his name.

[kukapetal]

[quote=Trodgmey ]

It’s not hate. It’s being forced to play in a way that forces both myself and the adopted daughter to act like clueless fools. It was a very good set-up for a story, but frustrating play-through.[/quote]

I wasn’t referring to the story itself, I was referring to how there seemed to be so much hate for the Young Stags, who, prior to this story, were one of the more harmless groups in Fallen London.

[shadowcthuhlu]

I suspect it might be some misdirected hate from dealing with real life fraternities. All it takes is one obnoxious group on your campus. . .

[shadowcthuhlu]

That’s probably their original inspiration (though I thought of the drones first) but since I’m not sure how many members of the forum are American or at the very least heavily inundated with American culture (i.e. Animal House for example) to recognize similar behavior.

[Diptych]

Of course, the actual campus club are the Stoats, who have a bitter rivalry with the Stags - the Town to the Stoats’ Gown. But, clubs of rich privileged idiots who all watch each others’ backs are familiar and found loathsome the world over, whether they’re a Greek society, a business council, a dining club who have sordid rituals involving pigs…

Incidentally, do I recall seeing it suggested in the story that the Stags predate the Fall, barely? If that’s the case, they might have a Surface equivalent. The name suggests the Bucks, but they’re 20th century. London clubs founded in the five years before the Fall include the Alpine (unlikely), Pratt’s (appropriate name, at least) and the Savage (rather more like it.)

edited by Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook on 4/11/2016

[kukapetal]

@Sir Frederick Tanah-Chook

But, clubs of rich privileged idiots who all watch each others’ backs are familiar and found loathsome the world over, whether they’re a Greek society, a business council, a dining club who have sordid rituals involving pigs…

Yes, how dare a group of rich privileged idiots hang out together and have fun on their own time and their own dime. In a world of soul-stealing devils, face stealing monstrosities, murdering crime-lords, thieves, killers, monsters, slavery, corruption…heck, in a world where the PLAYER can gleefully and without consequence do all manner of evil, cruel, selfish things…truly rich idiots whose biggest crime (prior to this story) was being annoying…truly THEY are the ones deserving of our scorn and contempt. Because…they’re rich, I guess.

How many of the other people and groups you guys hang out with in the game are rich? How many of them do things far worse than play pranks? How many of you have characters who have gotten rich? How many of those characters do things more evil than play pranks? In fact, how many of them have GOTTEN rich doing evil things? Rich young idiots are usually born into their wealth, so even the manner in which they’ve gotten rich is less evil than all the &quotcool&quot or &quotsympathetic&quot people who get rich via murder, thievery, corruption and ripping out people’s souls with a fork…and that includes a great many of your characters.

Sorry to keep going on about this, but the hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness here is baffling to me.

[gilphon]

Nobody’s saying ‘I always knew they were evil’; they’re saying ‘I always thought they were assholes’. It’s more about them being unpleasant than about moral fibre. And, well, there’s a difference between doing bad things because it benefits you and doing bad things because it amuses you.

I mean, I think presenting them as harmless pranksters is a stretch. Some of their pranks are kind of malicious. And generally, when somebody’s idea of a good time is to make somebody else suffer, I don’t really expect them to have totally clean consciouses.

[kukapetal]

@Gilphon

Nobody’s saying ‘I always knew they were evil’; they’re saying ‘I always thought they were assholes’. It’s more about them being unpleasant than about moral fibre. And, well, there’s a difference between doing bad things because it benefits you and doing bad things because it amuses you.

Morally, there is no difference. You do an evil thing, you do an evil thing, regardless of the reason why. Hurting someone so you can have money or cool stuff is just as evil as hurting someone to watch them suffer…or even hurting someone because you think they deserve it or because you’re trying to help someone else. People aren’t things to use, regardless of what you’re using them for.

And I’ll clarify again that there’s nothing wrong with playing an evil character or siding with evil groups in the game…but if you do you’ve kind of lost the right to sneer at annoying fratboys who play pranks, even mean ones. They’re still choirboys compared to you and your pals :P

[absimiliard]

As my character once said to their particular friend. “Tell me about this Parthenaeum club-thingy. I love scandal so I thought I’d like the Stags, but Chuffy is just such a mean-spirited pratt I can’t see hanging out with him.”

I guess my character probably spoke with a less modern patois, but you get my point. It wasn’t that they thought the Stags were evil (or “EVIL!!!”), rather that they thought the Stags were mean-spirited. (my character is a Magnanimous and Steadfast sort, pretty solidly)

That said, I never had my character progress beyond the first prank Chuffy wants you to play. They did that first one, said “Nuh Uh” and moved on. I could very easily have missed out on a host of very cool people and stories, but that’s just Life on the Streets in Fallen London…

[kukapetal]

@Robin Mask

Morality is relative, though . . .

No, it is not. Morality is absolute. You act morally because it is right-it is not some trade-off based on who you like more or will make happier.

@Robin Mask

Example, hurting someone can be said to be wrong, yes, but how do we define ‘hurt’? The story of Comtessa (sp?) was so powerful as it was so ambiguous . . . if we ignore a lot of the variables; killing her would ‘hurt’ her lover, but letting her live would ‘hurt’ her . . . I think &quotFallen London&quot is built more around this moral ambiguity than anything else. It’s not so easy to say ‘evil is evil’.

The only moral choice in that situation is doing what the Comtessa would want you to do. The ambiguity in that situation comes from not being sure what it is she wants and having to guess. However, if you purposely disregard what you think would be her own wishes about what happens to her own life in order to make her lover happy then yes, that would be evil. It is wrong to take the Comtessa’s choice about her own fate out of her hands to make someone else happy. The Comtessa is not a thing to use, she is a person.

@Robin Mask

Like, I’m a bit too tired to find in game examples except that one, but some potential real life examples. If killing one person would mean saving thousands, would that be evil? If X has a surplus of food that he won’t let starving Y have, is Y still wrong for stealing to survive? If you hide the truth from someone so they don’t get hurt, are you still acting unethically by taking from them their right to choose?

When the choice comes down to someone dying regardless of what you do, then yes, the moral thing would be to minimize the casualties.

Stealing to survive is still stealing, although it is a forgivable sin. You should do what you can to repay your debt when you are able to, however.

Withholding information someone has a right to know is wrong because it is not your place to decide for them. You are robbing them of their ability to make an informed choice.

@Robin Mask

In the game, sometimes we might kill to prevent others being killed. We might hurt others to protect another. In one story, a character kidnaps another in order to survive themselves . . . in another you have a complex choice of letting a person suffer to prevent a greater tragedy, or ease their suffering and allow a greater tragedy to occur . . . then there’s what ‘benefits’ society, particular factions, future potential cities, your loved ones, etc. It doesn’t have to be a material benefit, but sometimes a moral benefit.

Killing to save others or defend yourself is not immoral. Placing another in danger to save your own butt is indeed immoral. Choosing between letting one person suffer or letting two cities full of people suffer is a similar choice to the &quotkilling one person to save thousands&quot choice above and therefore the moral choice is to ease the greatest suffering by preventing the greater tragedy.

Killing someone to benefit society is evil, and if society &quotneeds&quot such a thing, it’s a sign of a sick society not worth preserving.

Same with killing someone to benefit your organization

Same with killing someone to benefit your loved ones

I fail to see how doing something immoral will give you a moral benefit

@Robin Mask

Anyway, my point is that morality is complex and relative, so sometimes the intention behind an ‘evil’ deed matters considerably, and - in a game such as this - nothing is black and white. It’s possible for some people to hate the Stags, dislike the Stags, or find them immoral, but still be ‘immoral’ themselves without any hypocrisy . . . after all, what’s wrong to one person is right to another.

Again, morality is neither relative nor complex. This is just something people tell themselves to justify doing what they want instead of what is right.

As for intentions mattering…well, I hope you’ll remember what the road to Hell is paved with ;)

[kukapetal]

Hey, how dare you take the wind out of my self-righteous sails! :P

EDIT: Also, how dare you delete your post and make me look insane :P
edited by Kukapetal on 4/11/2016

[professorstrix]

Ignoring merrily the big discussion of morality here, I just want to point out that everything is “fun and games” until some rich boys pull a prank that ruin something valuable for you (your best stats-raising clothes, your expensive new shoes, your Semiotic Monocle) and they refuse to pay up because “don’t be such a spoil-sport, dude, a prank is a prank, it was just a joke”. Bonus points if they so richer than you that, to them, the thing they ruined is really cheap, but for you, it means months of savings. Double the points if, in the end, you are the one that look like a miser for making a case of something so pointless (for them).

grumblegrumble Might as well make a specially hard examination for those darned pranking students. Their moans shall be my compensation. grumblegrumblegrumble

This is, in short, why I instinctively dislike any “pranking club”, specially if everyone there is rich and don’t know how hard some people have to work to buy things.

[[OOC: So it doesn’t degenerate in another morality discussion, it was an in-character ramble. IRL, when a rich prankster boy threatened to break something mine for funsies (he liked to make girls cry), I broke it myself and cried to the teacher until she made he pay for it. I was an eight-years-old and my grasp in morality was way more relaxed. Which is a way to say that I sometimes wonder how I resisted becoming a full-blown super-villain in adulthood.
The point is, no one in that particular moment of my life was right. The boy was making girls cry, I was punishing him through lies and deceit and the teachers weren’t even aware of what was happening right in front of themselves for weeks. Often, in life, there are no victims, only a bunch of jerks that deserve each other.]]

[absimiliard]

[quote=Kukapetal]Hey, how dare you take the wind out of my self-righteous sails! :P

EDIT: Also, how dare you delete your post and make me look insane :P
edited by Kukapetal on 4/11/2016[/quote]

I’m so sorry about that. I hadn’t seen you reply yet and I felt that I was being a bit of a pratt myself, which was not my intent. Further, I felt I was contributing to derailing a threat from it’s intended topic.

So I deleted the post.

Deepest apologies. I had no intent to make you seem a fool