Postby Money » Sat Aug 17, 2019 1:26 pm
I'll preface this by saying that I enjoy what En Kell has brought to the game and that this post is likely going to be a bit repetitive given that this conversation has been going on for a while and leaked outside this thread. That said, here are my 20 cents.
I agree with Rocket Frog that En Kell has provided something this game has lacked. In my opinion, En Kell has provided a source of "classic" storytelling conflict with traditional good/evil dynamics that doesn't involve En Kell being a caricature - I love that she has a system of belief that allows her to be the "good guy" from her perspective rather then the "I kill people because I'm evil" rationale that I've seen in the past. She has also, in my opinion, utilized a sub-optimal playstyle (in terms of mechanical efficiency, not RP) to let characters RP their encounters with her. However, based on what I've read on the forum, she may at one point have violated rules regarding consent and explicit RP. That's unfortunate, but it sounds like that issue occured due to a lack of understanding regarding the rules and has now been resolved.
Some criticisms of the criticisms of En Kell are hyperbolic at best. The idea that En Kell is some form of super evil that is breaking the game is pretty laughable. In terms of evil, cannibals, pirates, psychopaths, rapists, serial killers and other villainous sorts have existed since the start of the game. They've done darker things on a wider scale then her for less reason and with less opportunity to opt-out or even resist. Is she the top villain in the English Zone right now? Based on the public reactions of some community members I think that's a fair assessment, but historically I don't find her to be much of an outlier in terms of pure "evilness". As for mechanically (i.e actually) shutting down locations, that appears to result from OOC emotions locking the fearful players into an imaginary cage, a poor understanding of how much of a threat she actually is in-game (mechanically at least), or some combination of the two.
Some of criticisms of En Kell and her player are simply silly. Villainy is an allowed playstyle, full stop. One of the suggested roles on the front page is that of a pirate. Combat mechanics (dragging/hitting) are in the game and don't require consent. If that's disruptive to your RP or your life then I'm sorry to hear that, but Cantr, as a game, isn't built right if your goal is to hive yourself off from the outside world and play uninterrupted with a handful of like minded players. You can campaign to change that, but I think you'll find the community is pretty conservative about major changes to the game.
Finally, some of the criticisms of En Kell and her player are starting to cross the line (based on the limited number I can see on the forum) from poor form to online harrassment. Calling players of villains sick, depraved, or damaged is rude, hurtful, and, in my opinion, illogical. Are authors who write from a villain's perspective depraved? Are people who participate in evil D and D campaigns damaged? Just because you can get in that mindset, doesn't mean you actually have that mindset. Calling them those things alone would be poor form, but the repetitiveness of it, across multiple threads of this forum at the very least, reads as an attempt to harm the emotional well being of the player and push that player out of the community. I hope they read this and know they're not alone and there are players who appreciate their contribution to the game.