RPing Questions? Ask Here!

[Soviet Catalonia]

How do I delete a post?

As long as you are the last person to post in a thread, you will see and X sign at the top right of your post where "edit" and "quote" are. This will allow you to delete the post. If someone posts after you do, but you want your post deleted, ask moderation to do so.

Thanks. And what about a thread?

[Oseato]

As long as you are the last person to post in a thread, you will see and X sign at the top right of your post where "edit" and "quote" are. This will allow you to delete the post. If someone posts after you do, but you want your post deleted, ask moderation to do so.

Thanks. And what about a thread?

If its your thread you should post in Moderation asking for it to be removed.

[Soviet Catalonia]

Thanks. And what about a thread?

If its your thread you should post in Moderation asking for it to be removed.

Moderation?

[Kyrusia]

If its your thread you should post in Moderation asking for it to be removed.

Moderation?

This board. That being said, as far as I am aware, Moderation does not delete any thread simply based upon request. If the thread only has your post in it, you can delete it just like you can any post and it will vanish. If the thread contains more than your own post, I believe you can request the thread to be locked if you are the thread's OP (original poster/owner; you can request a lock in this thread), where it will be allowed to vanish into the board, or you can simply stop posting in the thread, largely accomplishing the same thing.

Hope that helps.

Edit: Added "Move, Merge, Gravedig, or Lock" Megathread link.

[Ardoki]

Someone just added guards in the middle of a diplomatic conference without declaring them present at all earlier.

What is that called again? Is it metagaming?

[Lamoni]

Someone just added guards in the middle of a diplomatic conference without declaring them present at all earlier.

What is that called again? Is it metagaming?

Godmodding or Metagaming. Either one works. Either way, that person should have either made it clear to everyone at the start that the guards are there, or should have communicated to everyone in the thread that they meant for the guards to be there, but mistakenly forgot to say anything.

[Ardoki]

Someone just added guards in the middle of a diplomatic conference without declaring them present at all earlier.

What is that called again? Is it metagaming?

Godmodding or Metagaming. Either one works. Either way, that person should have either made it clear to everyone at the start that the guards are there, or should have communicated to everyone in the thread that they meant for the guards to be there, but mistakenly forgot to say anything.

He basically committed a serious crime, so I moved to have him arrested.

Then twelve guards suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

EDIT: Thanks for the answer though.

[Lamoni]

You're welcome. He really should not have suddenly had those guards appear, so the thread OP can make him retcon them, if the OP wants.

[The Templar High Council]

Godmodding or Metagaming. Either one works. Either way, that person should have either made it clear to everyone at the start that the guards are there, or should have communicated to everyone in the thread that they meant for the guards to be there, but mistakenly forgot to say anything.

He basically committed a serious crime, so I moved to have him arrested.

Then twelve guards suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

EDIT: Thanks for the answer though.

Obviously, his guards were ninjas.

[Shazbotdom]

You're welcome. He really should not have suddenly had those guards appear, so the thread OP can make him retcon them, if the OP wants.

To be fair, I read through the part in question and Ardoki threatened to arrest his diplomatic delegation for presenting evidence that only shed a dark aura over another delegation. Therefore Ardoki seemed to have broken RP Etiquette in a manner.

[Ardoki]

You're welcome. He really should not have suddenly had those guards appear, so the thread OP can make him retcon them, if the OP wants.

To be fair, I read through the part in question and Ardoki threatened to arrest his diplomatic delegation for presenting evidence that only shed a dark aura over another delegation. Therefore Ardoki seemed to have broken RP Etiquette in a manner.

His delegate has illegally fabricated official statistics, which was a crime.

But the reason I tried to have him arrested was because his actions and behaviour were hijacking and undermining the supposed diplomatic conference - So I needed to get rid of him in order for the diplomatic conference to continue.

[Maltropia]

If he's causing disruptions that mean you want him out of the RP, it's probably better to do that OOC and just notify him by TG or in your OOC thread that he's no longer welcome (assuming you're the OP. I haven't looked). Dragging OOC problems into an IC situation (or the other way around) rarely bodes well.

[Kyrusia]

If he's causing disruptions that mean you want him out of the RP, it's probably better to do that OOC and just notify him by TG or in your OOC thread that he's no longer welcome (assuming you're the OP. I haven't looked). Dragging OOC problems into an IC situation (or the other way around) rarely bodes well.

Just to add-on to Malt's advice here: respecting the divide between Out-of-Character and In-Character actions and events and understanding why this is important is paramount to having an enjoyable and mutually beneficial experience in NationStates roleplaying. The divide between OOC and IC is one of the community mores of NS roleplaying which more or less transcends the individual boards: from II to P2TM, the proscription against meta-gaming (which is ultimately, if one distills the meaning of the term, a violation of the IC/OOC divide) is respected.

This is a bit of advice echoed by many across the community: your "worst In-Character enemy" should be one of your best Out-of-Character friends. It is paramount to have a cordial and working relationship with any player that has a state or organization you (the collective "you," as in "any player") intend to roleplay your own state/organization against in an antagonistic way, because, ultimately, roleplaying and In-Character plot resolution relies heavily on collaboration between players. Given, by necessity, that the plots involved in war, conflict, etc. can often be emotional In-Character and lead to comprehensive changes in an IC entity's status, not having a friendly, working relationship with the player behind your state's opponent can lead to difficulties: from simple arguments to an escalation of behavior that has a propensity to lead to rule violations.

This is why we often strongly advise players whom cannot reconcile their differences in Out-of-Character perspectives and opinions regarding events simply, in the least, take a step back from the table and cool off; if it continues, it is probably best to simply no longer roleplay together. There is no reason any player on NationStates should feel compelled to roleplay with a player that they simply cannot get along with or do not like, as NS roleplaying is ultimately predicated on voluntary consent and collaboration; OOC animosity, distrust, and ill favor inhibits this collaboration and complicates the sort of consensual relationship required for roleplaying to be successful and enjoyable for everyone involved.

Further, Out-of-Character events should never act as the justification (much less casus belli) for In-Character events; it is one thing to talk with another player and get an idea to have a war (this is more or less necessary, after all), it is another thing entirely to dislike another player or their OOC actions and try and use such as a justification for war. If a player dislikes another to this degree, it is best to simply not work together.

As such, Ardoki, if you are having Out-of-Character difficulties with another player and do not feel you and the other(s) involved can reach a compromise or point of Out-of-Character reconciliation, it is probably best to sit back from the table and reconsider your continued involvement with that player and any potential future involvement with that player; that goes the same for any player whom is concerned over roleplaying with any other player where they feel pressured to work with someone they do not personally have a rapport or friendly relationship with. Roleplaying is based on consent, and no one on NationStates is forced to roleplay with someone they do not desire to roleplay with.

Lastly, if you are the OP of an In-Character thread, you have absolute sovereignty to remove another player from that thread and may exercise this power based upon your own prerogative (in other words, you do not have to have a reason to remove them from your thread). You may simply request they cease posting politely; if they continue posting against this request, do not bother engaging, simply file a report in the "Moderation" forum and the staff will handle the situation.

Hope this helps yourself and any other player concerned with similar difficulties.

[Ardoki]

Yeah, thanks.

He has been on my ignore list for a while (mainly due to OOC harassment); I let him participate as I didn't want to go restricting my opponents and I thought he could behave himself.

I'm still not a 100% sure if he was purposelessly misbehaving or if he was acting purely OOC.

[Bankampar]

OOC: Keep in mind that even North-African countries have been deprived of technology in this timeline, so the most modern tech they would have is probably early WW1, without machine guns, aviation, or artillery(at the very best their army would be Napoleoinic, although significantly better than other countries(which still use swords and spears).

Wanted to see if anybody had thought this was true? They were speaking about Egypt in this way lol.

[Suekiva]

Is this thread open to military realism questions, or is there another thread for that?

[Lubyak]

Is this thread open to military realism questions, or is there another thread for that?

We're more focused on general RP questions, and while many of us can offer useful advice, there is a dedicated Military Advice Thread that focuses exclusively on military realism.

[Suekiva]

Is this thread open to military realism questions, or is there another thread for that?

We're more focused on general RP questions, and while many of us can offer useful advice, there is a dedicated Military Advice Thread that focuses exclusively on military realism.

Thanks!

[Noladea]

How does one RP.

[Lubyak]

How does one RP.

The short answer is that--on NationStates--RP is a form of co-operative story telling. You come together with your fellow players to jointly tell a story, talking about things that would happen, and working together to create something great.

As to how to do it, there are lots of guides going around, some of which have been compiled here. How to RP is a very wide topic, and lots of people will have different ideas on how its done, and different communities will have different rules. Perhaps start with these guides, and as you go on, ask more detailed and specific questions to help clarify things as needed.

[North Yemen-]

How does one RP.

If you're confused, do what Lubyak said for sure. Then take a good read through here. These are some of the ground rules and all that.

It's also usually a good idea to read other peoples' RP threads, and to try RPing yourself. You can't learn soccer from the bench.

[New Axiom]

So how exactly would you fight a war?

[Roski]

So how exactly would you fight a war?

First, nation build. Build your population and economic stats

This will allow you to address a military doctrine, and allow you to build your military based on that.

There is an NS Military Realism thread, and the three-four helpful people can help you build your military based on those.

If you don't know this basic information, you probably shouldn't engage another nation militarily.

[Lubyak]

So how exactly would you fight a war?

Co-operation.

In the words of one of the players I respect the most: "Your worst in-character enemy should be your best out of character friend."

When fighting a war, you need to co-operate with your fellow players to tell the story of the war. Suggest ideas, come to agreements on who will win or lose, or maybe let chance decide. The exact method you choose doesn't matter, but war RP--more than any other--require a lot of effort at co-operation. Going in with the attitude that one needs to 'win' the RP, is a step in the wrong direction.

[The Macabees]

So how exactly would you fight a war?

As Roski points out, there are some details you might want to work out the pieces on the chessboard at your disposal, so to speak.

But, with all the pieces you might have, you can't do anything with them unless you know how to move them, right?

The way a war is fought is by interpreting it through a story. You develop a plot, and that can be as simple as "I'm declaring war on Ruritania and invading it." The story is the explanation of how this happens and you can do this from several points of view. You can describe the invasion; e.g. "The infantry division tasked with taking Random Town A struck early morning, hitting several points along its perimeter simultaneously and from several directions." You can also roleplay it from the perspective of a soldier, or from that of a civilian in the city being attacked, and you can even roleplay it from different perspectives. You can also roleplay in the form of news stories. You can roleplay it anyway you'd like to, but you basically just write the war out.

You can play "solo" and just write a thread on your own. If the posts are good and you're consistent, other people might look to join (you can invite them by leaving '[Open]' at the end of the thread title). Otherwise, you can put up what's called an OOC (out of character) thread, where you give a synopsis of the plot/idea behind the thread and you can cooperate with others on how the plot develops.

It's also always worth considering Sunset's advice to another player a couple of pages back. What can drive a good war RP thread is the story, so focus on that rather than all the arguably unnecessary details (e.g. your army organization down to the platoon level). Besides, you can figure out the minutiae over time. The important part is just to get in there and start writing!