Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
Sure, but in roleplaying or quest format, acting like that does in fact mean that you are constantly going to have less fun.
Marked for Death: A Rational Naruto Quest
- Thread starter eaglejarl
- Start date
-
- Tags
- naruto rationalist romance armageddon is looking better and better damn you kishimoto explosions everywhere explosives solve everyone if in doubt surrender to the mercy of zabuza it seemed like a good idea at the time looks like a really bad case of being a jōnin my god. where does the lore end? precommitting is the winning plan screaming in kagome screw the rules i have explosives something bad might still happen sometimes you gotta sociopath stabby zabby subsection c of paragraph 9 should include we can weaponize this so hard
- Location
- Book Fort
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Given that you are ignoring my requests regarding your tone and your language, and given that you are ignoring an independent third party expressing similar discontent with your behavior, I am going to disengage from this conversation.
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Yes. That was me trying to be 'blunt but not asshole', but I don't expect RandomOTP to care. Moment someone pops up who actually has knowledge in a relevant field to say they're wrong, they declare that they're leaving the conversation. And hell, I'm being more civil than most posters in this thread have been, I'm downright nice compared to some of the arguments I've seen here. But this has RandomOTP declaring it's too far. Convenient.
Last edited:
Not to be arrogant about it, but unless he's a genius on the level of Jiraiya or Hazou, and he's not - Hazou would have noticed - he doesn't have much to contribute at this point. Strictly essie territory.
Hazou can't execute his clanmembers on a whim, he needs to get it countersigned by Asuma.
Saying Hazou's behavior is unethical is your opinion, thanks for sharing it.
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
I don't, uh, actually think unethical behavior is much a matter of opinion in all cases, actually. In borderline stuff, sure, but this is a matter where Hazou directly has leadership over people and is making demands of them, which is an area that is rife for unethical behavior, even unintentionally.
I'm not, personally, familiar with all of the standards that social workers are held to, but it seems to me that there's enough in common between the field and clan headship that it's worth listening to him.
When you're in a position of authority, you do have to be aware of that fact, and adjust for it in how you behave. I've been around enough people that don't, to learn that.
I don't understand how what is and is not unethical could ever be anything but a matter of opinion.
I'm sure there's some textbook definition for social workers, but really it just means immoral behavior and morals change with the times and depending on who you talk to. So whether something is or is not ethical is always a matter of opinion.
Now this matters a lot when the person giving the opinion is say, a judge, or an ethics board, deciding to revoke your license to practice social work, but it is always a matter of opinion.
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
We exist in the same global society and communicate in the same language. We live in the same ecosystem -- sufficient that saying something being unethical is a matter of opinion doesn't strike me as cogent, any more than saying "It's a little warm out right now" for someone in California or Texas at noon would be a matter of opinion.
e: To put it another way, saying something is unethical communicates a fact about the environment. It's gesturing at reality, in a way that things that are commonly called opinions like taste in food or music, do not.
Last edited:
Please note that I do not wish to offend anyone, and that I am trying to make this debate as unpassionate as possible to 1) understand your perspective 2) avoid bitterness in our discourse.
Now back on the original issue. It is my view that insofar as new adoptees accepted to be adopted, they consented to the following trade: 'we, your new clan will support you with all we have, and in exchange you will contribute everything you know to better the clan'. If - the QMs hopefully will enlighten us on this - there is a norm of new adoptees divulging secrets and jutsus to their new clan, then the adoptees knew what they were getting into. If they have strong feelings about keeping their secrets, then you don't have to get adopted. You can stay in KEI. As per the French expression, you can't get both the butter and the money you paid the butter with. It may suck, it may be unfair to some (more than others), but if that's the rules of the game you can't blame one player and not the others. Especially when you agreed to play by the rules.
Edit: while I have tried hard to tone down my response, I am aware this may still seem provocative. I hope you won't take it personally; we try to be reasonable adults and I think we should be able to have emotionally safe discussions. For transparency (again, please do not take it personally, I am really saying this to explain my perception): I am probably 'triggered' by your discourse (which I perceive as overly aggressive), as it looks to me as if you use your authority/moral high-ground to crush the opinion of other players, without explaining your reasons for doing so.
I notice you are taking this very personally, as you work in this field and it is a subject you care about. I understand that feeling very well. But please, explain why someone's reasoning is wrong based on logic/experience rather than your authority as a practitioner. It does not come off well, and undermines your cause. You seem to have very confident insights, and we want to understand why. Also, a less charged discourse would greatly help. I know it might sound condescending - as you explicitly asked me to analyse the original issue through the prism of emotions - but we are currently exchanging opinions and strong emotions can get in the way (eg, raise red flags and make others uncomfortable).
Now back on the original issue. It is my view that insofar as new adoptees accepted to be adopted, they consented to the following trade: 'we, your new clan will support you with all we have, and in exchange you will contribute everything you know to better the clan'. If - the QMs hopefully will enlighten us on this - there is a norm of new adoptees divulging secrets and jutsus to their new clan, then the adoptees knew what they were getting into. If they have strong feelings about keeping their secrets, then you don't have to get adopted. You can stay in KEI. As per the French expression, you can't get both the butter and the money you paid the butter with. It may suck, it may be unfair to some (more than others), but if that's the rules of the game you can't blame one player and not the others. Especially when you agreed to play by the rules.
I think this deserves a separate response. Please do not pretend to know what's inside another person's head. I believe ROPT has been fair in his responses, but even if he was not, I am upset that you would continue bashing someone who's already left the discussion. You are allowed to be graceful, even if you think your interlocutor was not. That was not youthful.
Edit: while I have tried hard to tone down my response, I am aware this may still seem provocative. I hope you won't take it personally; we try to be reasonable adults and I think we should be able to have emotionally safe discussions. For transparency (again, please do not take it personally, I am really saying this to explain my perception): I am probably 'triggered' by your discourse (which I perceive as overly aggressive), as it looks to me as if you use your authority/moral high-ground to crush the opinion of other players, without explaining your reasons for doing so.
Last edited:
- Location
- UK
This is more true if you agree with the player character's actions and less true if you don't.
I recommend the book "The WEIRDEST people in the world" by Joseph Henrich. It shows how much of a divide there is between the West's ethics and the rest of the world. Even within the west, ethics is not so monolithic. Not all states within the US have banned the death penalty. Gay rights are not guaranteed everywhere in the west. It does sound to me like ethics can be a matter of opinion (edit: or at least, ethics is not so obvious that a moral proposition will immediately be recognized as such without an explanation).
Last edited:
- Location
- USA
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Well that was a joyful thing to wake up to.
Shane: Yes, you were being an asshole. Don't insult other players. Don't accuse them of bad faith. If you are too exercised to manage that, step away from the keyboard.
Your expertise is a completely different topic from your presentation. @RandomOTP isn't stepping away because your expertise trumps their argument, they're stepping away because you were being an asshole, you refused to stop when asked politely, and when called out for it you doubled down.
As to the specific issue of ninja culture and expectations related to jutsu sharing, I'll get back to you after I catch up with the other QMs and make sure we're all on the same page. Until then, everyone please stop discussing the issue.
Ethics is complicated. For one thing, the basis of it is always subjective, even if judgements based on that basis are then objective. A believer in Christian divine command theory ("whatever God commands is moral") will say that the genocide of the Amalekites was moral and that homosexuality is immoral. A believer in utilitarian consequentialism ("whatever promotes human flourishing is moral") will say that the genocide of the Amalekites was immoral and homosexuality is not a moral question in exactly the same way that heterosexuality is not a moral question. (i.e. it's neither moral nor immoral in and of itself, although the way it's practiced can be moral or immoral.)
Even given the same moral grounding, it's possible to weigh different elements of a question differently when those elements represent tradeoffs. For example, the pro-life position weights the fetus's right to life higher than the mother's right to control her body. The pro-choice faction weights the mother's right to control her body higher than the fetus's right to life (if it has one, which some would debate). I have a whole lot to say about the abortion issue but it's off topic here so I'll leave it with the hopefully non-judgemental presentation above and ask that it be left alone.
To bring it back around to the MfD topic at hand, the ethics here are murky. One view is that joining a clan means you are voluntarily giving up some of your rights in exchange for the advantages of being in the clan. (That's a normal thing in any society -- living in modern America means that I need to follow the laws even though those laws necessarily curtail my freedoms in certain ways that I might not agree with.) Even there, is the clan considered a communal entity, in which case everyone is expected to share all advantages that would preserve the lives of other members, or is it a collection of closely allied individuals, in which case you can choose whether or not to share but you can't expect others to share. Is there an expectation of a "signing bonus", where you will automatically get a bunch of cool stuff the moment you join? How much authority are you agreeing to give the clan over you -- it's okay for the Clan Head to order you to kill a foreigner for purposes of a mission, but can they order you to kill a Leaf citizen? If you're an I&S ninja then they can send you on a honeypot mission where the expectation is that you will be required to have sex with someone, but I&S ninja opted into that. If the clan is at existential risk unless a particular honeypot mission happens but there are no I&S ninja available, can the Clan Head order a regular ninja to do it? It could be argued that they made the choice to become a ninja and the consequence of that is that they they opted in to doing whatever missions they were assigned. It could also be argued that becoming a ninja isn't actually a free choice in this society and thus can't be considered opting in to arbitrary missions.
Like I said, ethics is complicated and there is room for disagreement.
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
It's genuinely amusing to me that you're referring me to that book in that context when the very point you're making is what led to this discussion -- but point taken.
- Pronouns
- They/Them
Didn't insult them. Didn't accuse them of bad faith. I have consistently taken aim at the perspective they have shared, which is missing rather large parts of context and ignoring that the characters are of a vastly different culture, instead seeming to consider them as just... people on the street IRL. This is an entirely separate thing from their 'character' as others have expressed privately. I don't know RandomOTP, I don't need to know them. All I know is the things they've posted in this thread, and they have consistently ignored the emotions, culture, etc of characters to instead focus upon a RAW interpretation of their actions/words. Not a single part of this is an 'attack' or an 'insult'. It's an assessment of their own words.
Do you have time for me to cite you half a dozen textbooks/journals that you'd need to pay or have pretty expansive tertiary-education-provided access to databases to read? Otherwise, you're asking me to explain a field from first principles, solely because... that field is not considered to have the same respect as 'hard' sciences are. If a person says 'that structure you're describing won't hold' and cites their experience as an engineer, do you ask them for detailed explanations from first principles, or do you believe them?
I am here, telling you 'that leader of an organisation is acting unethically and incorrectly and the junior who answers to him is not making up her problems with his behavior', and saying this is my field. Unless you want me to prescribe you multiple boring as fuck textbooks/journals in the field of organisational ethics or spend the next three hours doing nothing but typing, referring to notes and citations, you're gonna have to take my word on that. It's not even that subjective; this is just 'if have power, must use wisely, conscientiously and self-critically'. It's Superman/Spiderman ethics, the simplest ethics of all.
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
In other news: I was considering on discord some of the things Primordial Sealing might be capable of.
Based on its in-story effects, it's capable of large, reaching changes across the whole world... which immediately brings to mind the other thing we've seen happen that's unexplainable by current paradigms: Whirlpool's disappearance. It could be the case that they had access to Primordial Sealing. And, coincidentally... they were allied with Leaf. Perhaps they're responsible for Earthshaping being in the public library? Not directly -- I just mean, they might have shared it in ages past.
Based on its in-story effects, it's capable of large, reaching changes across the whole world... which immediately brings to mind the other thing we've seen happen that's unexplainable by current paradigms: Whirlpool's disappearance. It could be the case that they had access to Primordial Sealing. And, coincidentally... they were allied with Leaf. Perhaps they're responsible for Earthshaping being in the public library? Not directly -- I just mean, they might have shared it in ages past.
- Location
- Book Fort
- Pronouns
- They/Them
So, as a QM, themselves, requested: new topic or conversation!
Jutsu Audit XP! Assuming we get the full 300xp out of a possible 300xp (which is unlikely to happen, but one can dream), what should we spend it on?
In the Discord, Paper has expressed a personal distaste (but not official QM request, I think) for the jutsu audit xp being used to buy the 3D Sealing Stunt, since that would mean, narratively, Hazou rediscovers an ancient art and learns it within the week.
So, with that said, I'm thinking we should raise our combat stats to a survivable level. With 300xp, we can raise Hazou's Alertness to 39, and his Athletics to 39 (eff 42), with some room to raise up another 10-stat (so we have the pyramid support for another 20-stat, for another 30-stat, and so on).
My personal recommendation for the raised 10-stat is Bleeding River Impalement. It's a solid AoE attack jutsu that makes the equivalent of Difficult Terrain. Bleeding River Impalement, much like Surging Seas, would benefit from being raised as high as level-40.
Jutsu Audit XP! Assuming we get the full 300xp out of a possible 300xp (which is unlikely to happen, but one can dream), what should we spend it on?
In the Discord, Paper has expressed a personal distaste (but not official QM request, I think) for the jutsu audit xp being used to buy the 3D Sealing Stunt, since that would mean, narratively, Hazou rediscovers an ancient art and learns it within the week.
So, with that said, I'm thinking we should raise our combat stats to a survivable level. With 300xp, we can raise Hazou's Alertness to 39, and his Athletics to 39 (eff 42), with some room to raise up another 10-stat (so we have the pyramid support for another 20-stat, for another 30-stat, and so on).
My personal recommendation for the raised 10-stat is Bleeding River Impalement. It's a solid AoE attack jutsu that makes the equivalent of Difficult Terrain. Bleeding River Impalement, much like Surging Seas, would benefit from being raised as high as level-40.
- Location
- Yes.
Remind me: what is the reasoning behind leveling Athletics/Alertness before Calligraphy/other Sealing-related skills?
Cariyaga
Handsome Gentleperson
- Location
- United States
Combat's a domain, too, mostly, and that XP will push us over the hump for it.
- Location
- Texas
I agree with that. Survival first, then what is likely to be the last calligraphy improvement we make, then we pyramid juggle to make PS capstone.
- Location
- Yes.
I am confused. Why do we want to go over that hump (actually, what is that hump)?
- Location
- Book Fort
- Pronouns
- They/Them
I'd be okay with raising Callig a few points. Really, my main concern is getting Hazou's Alertness and Athletics as high as his current pyramids will allow (thankfully, IN means a 39 in Athletics will raise him through to the next AB, regardless of pyramids... which he needs, badly
)These are just some of my, personal, scattershot thoughts, in no particular order.
- His Athletics and Alertness have been in the 30s for ~3 irl years (at least, I'm pretty sure that they were that way when I first started back in the tail-end of 2019)
- This cycle of "Hazou can't go outside, he's squishy" and "Hazou's not a frontliner, let's raise Sealing" is a bit draining.
- Now that buffs have been nerfed, raising his Fundamentals have become more important than before, since we're limited in how much we can raise the Fundamentals with Sealing.
- Higher combat stats means that Hazou can survive random encounters (like the Ultra Lethal Crystal Cave) better. Akane was a solid special-jonin in combat strength, and had all of our buffs, and she still got flattened by a random encounter (assuming we're wrong about the conspiracy)
- Hazou taking Consequences every time he gets into combat is both amusing and frustrating
- Gotta show Mari that we listen to her sometimes, lol
Last edited:
- Location
- UK
- Pronouns
- He/Him
This was an error and has now been fixed. Thanks for catching it.
No. You have been making statements with implications on a player's character. Implying that they 'don't care', that they 'ragequitted' because they didn't want to lose in a debate, rather than because the format of the debate was unhealthy, that's a judgement on their character.
ROTP has been particularly vocal in making sure that Yuno's perspective of chapter 604 was taken into account. Explicitly on an emotional level, too. Now -without debating about the adoption issue - I would tentatively agree (for I haven't researched this issue) that few players have been vocally indignant to the treatment of new adoptees. ROTP is no more at fault - if fault there is - than me and others.
I don't need citations, just a logical argument. If you wish to include statistics you use in your work, that's great - I believe in your professional integrity not to falsify them to win an argument over this. If that's too much work, then perhaps GPT-4 could make a fair summary under your supervision?
I may be dumb, but I don't even know what it means to use power 'wisely'. As far as I know, this moral question has been debated for thousands of years and we still haven't reached an answer that satisfies most philosophers.
Last edited: