unforum

[Varin]

The PMs chose to let the "betrayal" happen. That probably means they had a crossroad set up in the storyline where the players could choose one direction or the other. They also chose whether or not they would listen to one player as the "deciding vote" over which road to follow.

I say just run with it and see what happens. For all you know, the character you've decided to support could be the bad guy in the end and you could be the one labelled the "betrayer" in the future.

[HaxanMike]

[krystyn]

Which is why we got to experience Lou sending frantic messages from the inside of a Port a Potty!

[Ofiuco]

As someone else playing PA3, I have to come out and say I am not sure I like the way everyone else playing decided to react to this 'betrayal'. I understand why, but it has made playing the game very difficult. It seems to have entirely lost the cohesiveness that made playing, say, OC, so much fun.

On the other hand, as a roleplayer who has made equally questionable decisions in her time, I do think players are entirely within their rights to do things like this. It makes things more interesting, that's for sure! It'd be nice if the 'betrayer' were really still working with the players (a sort of Bros before Hos principle, if you will) but of course things don't always work out that way.

In this particular situation, maybe the best thing to do is to talk to Rusty and see if we can't all get along. :D No, seriously -- none of us really know which 'side' in the game is the 'right' side, so why not play all of them at once?

[Marrec]

I see where the panic and recoil is coming from. With a community like ours, 'betrayal' isn't exactly the name of the game. I remember back when I was actively participating in PXC (Before LCP gave me no hope of catching up) people were trying to send messages to all kinds of different people and precieved factions within the story to try and betray or help the cause. The PMs, being experienced and knowledgable as they are, ignored/excused almost all of these. Again, as people have stated, it's up to the PM to decided where to go from here...

But that doesn't help your situation at all. Rusty is still lurking and waiting to leek more information, right? You need 99.9% of the players to help you solve the puzzle or disseminate the information so that it's useful to the protagonist. There is .1% of the players that will take this carefully nutured and hard won information and give it straight to the bad-guy. So seemingly, this .1% has changed the dynamic of the game and made it a gamble to even post on the boards. In essence, making the whole experience less fun. At least this is your initial reaction. And from my standpoint, it's a completely legitimate reaction.

If you think about it though, it does change the dynamic of the game. Essentially, you have a spy to work around. Lots of solutions here. Feed him false information if you want to. That's always fun and will only help the good-guy. Join him if you want to. Again, fun (for some people). Let protagonist man know about the mole. Destroy spy man's credability in antagonist man's mind. Or just keep playing like you have been. Just remember that if the game isn't fun anymore, stop playing. There will be another game.

[rose]

I thought the issue at hand in this thread was "what happens when players (whether they are active on unfiction or not) give a character information that could only have been obtained from another player's unfiction posting of 'confidential' information."

In most games truly confidential critical information is quite rare or even non-existant. Usually the PMs want information to be widely dispersed, so it is unlikely that one person will have information that isn't also obtainable from a website, direct email, or other public source.

As mentioned, the PMs always have a choice of ignoring information sent by any player, so if they choose to use that information in the story, they have a reason. I still find it unlikely that they designed a game whose progress required a player to "spy" on confidential unfiction postings. Most likely, Varin's assessment is correct, the PMs reached a 'crossroads' in the story and made a choice.

Conversely, the situation where players feel they have to choose one side or the other side in sharing information that is available to everyone is common. Usually we don't know who to trust, at least at first. If it is just a matter of which characters do we tell what everyone knows, everything is fair game - as Varin and Haxan Mike said, the PMs may be getting the information from all sides anyway- and they can then decide how to proceed.

[FLmutant]

[Phaedra]

[L.Boomer]

[FLmutant]

Great stuff in this thread

[SirQuady]

I agree that the PMs should and will have to deal with this. I know that we had some "problems" with AotH trying to deal with the whole Emile vs. Scapegoat (was actually quite entertaining), but that worked out with (most of) us kinda playing the middle ground between the two!

I know that also on AotH, when Ian and Nisha were at their most angry at each other, i kinda tried to play them against each other with a email or two, to see if they'd react and get more angry. What happened? Nothing the PMs ignored it. which is fine by me! Id rather be ignored by a PM than have the game messed up! (But i still want PMs to pay attention to me! MEMEMEMEME! )

[HaxanMike]

[Marrec]

[Phaedra]

[MageSteff]