Author Topic: Armageddon is a Social game.  (Read 1223 times)

RogueGunslinger

  • Posts: 18978
Armageddon is a Social game.
« on: December 04, 2018, 11:27:08 AM »
Sometimes I feel like the thing that makes Armageddon such a great game is also what keeps me away from it. The best part of Armageddon is the social interaction between players. But I always want to avoid people until I think my character is "ready" for that interaction. In a way this forms a sort of in-game social anxiety, where I avoid people so as not to ruin this perfect meeting in my mind. But then I never get my character to that "ready" state, because I'm so bored from avoiding interaction that I stop playing.

In the end it's my own damn fault. I need to just join a clan and get myself into experiences with other players.

Not much else to say. This would have been a Random Armageddon Thought. Feel free to discuss.

650Booger

  • Posts: 577
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2018, 12:04:08 PM »
I know the feeling, for example playing a heavy mercantile character who, at the start of play, can't actually craft anything successfully.  it takes some RP gymnastics to explain why kadius would hire a clothworker who rips every garment.
"Historical analogy is the last refuge of people who can't grasp the current situation."
-Kim Stanley Robinson

valeria

  • Posts: 5712
    • I have a writing page.
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2018, 12:16:42 PM »
I hear this. When I'm trying to decide on the next character to play, or waiting on the approval to go through, I spend more time than I'd like to admit playing out how their future social interactions might go in my head. To prepare, I guess? Odd social anxiety for the win.
Too gay to function since the early 2000s.
My Facebook writer page.

mansa

  • Posts: 9560
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2018, 12:18:20 PM »
I was running the dungeons and dragons starter edition with a bunch of new players, and I was a first time GM, and the question came up then.

Why are these characters hanging around each other and why do they rescue each other?  Why don't they just run away and split up?

I didn't have a good answer, but I put this up to the players - it's a social game and we play together.  Make up your own reasons to be in this gang.

I wish I had better answers but this question as to why characters should play with each other still bothers me a bit
New Players Guide: http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,33512.0.html


You win Armageddon, congratulations!  Type 'credits', then store your character and make a new one

Marauder Moe

  • Posts: 12909
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2018, 12:27:59 PM »
I hear this. When I'm trying to decide on the next character to play, or waiting on the approval to go through, I spend more time than I'd like to admit playing out how their future social interactions might go in my head. To prepare, I guess? Odd social anxiety for the win.

>.>

<.<

-_-

+1

Heade

  • Posts: 675
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2018, 01:39:29 PM »
Sometimes I feel like the thing that makes Armageddon such a great game is also what keeps me away from it. The best part of Armageddon is the social interaction between players. But I always want to avoid people until I think my character is "ready" for that interaction. In a way this forms a sort of in-game social anxiety, where I avoid people so as not to ruin this perfect meeting in my mind. But then I never get my character to that "ready" state, because I'm so bored from avoiding interaction that I stop playing.

In the end it's my own damn fault. I need to just join a clan and get myself into experiences with other players.

Not much else to say. This would have been a Random Armageddon Thought. Feel free to discuss.

You know, I don't really have this problem. Oftentimes, the people my PCs meet early on in their life, when they're struggling to pay for food and water, and have little gear to speak of...those are the people that often end up being my PC's lifelong friends/enemies/lovers/employers/employees. That early experience with your PC, when they really aren't "ready", is often a bonding experience.

But I also approach my PCs organically. I generally prefer Indie play, but won't necessarily avoid joining a clan if the right IC circumstances come along. I do make PCs with a rough OOC plan, but that plan is subject to change via RP. So, I don't avoid RP early on. Instead, I engage in what RP I can engage in early on. I might greb rocks for a city crafter who doesn't want to leave the city, or get them hides, or buy them things from rinth shops they don't want to risk visiting...whatever. Or, ask for these same services from others if I'm on the other side of the table. I might team up with someone else in the same boat as me to greb rocks together, or hunt chalton, or ask someone to take me between Morin's & Luir's. There are all sorts of interactions that end up being relationship building exercises early, that simply aren't the same once you're particularly self-sufficient.

And the reason is simple: It's harder to trust someone who doesn't need anything from you. That need, that interdependency builds trust that is far more difficult to attain once your PC is a badass. No one trusts a badass.

The opportunities for another PC to "save your life" also diminish as you get better, and more skilled. Those early periods of social development are often, in my opinion, an extension of my PCs "background" and "growing up", to where, people you meet and "grow up" with often form bonds and relationships that are much more difficult to attain later on. The bond of friendship that develops between two soldiers who train together, from the greenest of greenhorns to later become grizzled veterans, is a deep thing. And it's very different to the relationship between a superior officer, and that same soldier, who served together for the same period of time.

By avoiding RP until "ready", in my opinion, you avoid all the varying levels of relationship dynamics like these along the way. If your goal is to play a solo/hermit hunter with no friends, I guess that's a good way to go, though.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2018, 01:47:21 PM by Heade »
I used to have a funny signature, but I felt like no one took me seriously, so it's time to put on my serious face.

najdorf

  • Posts: 429
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2018, 03:42:00 PM »
Yeah I know the feeling. I used to avoid people until my preferred weapon skill was master.

flurry

  • Posts: 3342
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2018, 09:35:56 PM »
Why are these characters hanging around each other and why do they rescue each other?  Why don't they just run away and split up?

This made me think of Jack's iconic speech from LOST: "If we can't live together, we're going to die alone."
"No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream." - Shirley Jackson, The Haunting of Hill House

Harmless

  • Posts: 2754
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2018, 10:57:21 PM »
The game is definitely social and basically all online games carry with them a conscious awareness that someone else is possibly watching. This game is the best online RP I know of because the possibility for roles to be unique is the best of all other games, due to free-form RP ability. The more freedom (within restriction) that we get, the ability to play out a story in a long tale that both repeats itself yet somehow stays fresh (mostly DUE to other players' unexpected turns and movements), is why after more than 10 years of playing, it still scratches my itch (AKA addiction) for a roleplaying experience.

But, it is also stressful, just like socializing can be stressful in real life. Sometimes I can't tolerate a role because of where it is going. I need rapid and satisfying "outs" in those cases, such as a good death or a good use of >rebel. I used to do strictly background roles, lots of breed hunters and such, or elves. The low expectations of non-humans was a relief. But by playing those roles, it was like an introduction to deeper relationship building. I probably learned to form bonds via my usual "I'm shade with anything" attitude-bearing breed who looks like a human archetype I did at least 10 times in various iterations.

I admit I also once preferred Tuluk because it was quieter and had a more easygoing initial approach to RP. When I started in Nak, I would almost always play independents who had nothing to do with the Nak social game. Obviously, when Tuluk closed, I was forced to play my city concepts in Nak, and since my city concepts typically involved clans, I started RPing in Nak clans (merchant, noble, etc). At first, it was hard -- I might feel "outed" as being a Tuluki with a faux pais or I might be called a "breed" even if I wasn't because I would obsess over my failures or be overly humble, or what have you. Somehow, I eventually learned to play a bit more of a confident role, though, and rose to the rank of First Trooper and such, but I always gave out once leadership became a regular responsibility (ahem, part-time job)

Then, I learned that when joining a clan or group, I am happier if I play as a character with a role/background that will make it less likely you'll be asked to lead too early, giving yme a chance to learn the clan's patterns before being expected to "perform" as a pro. Examples are being young or being of an atypical race or skillset for the role. This way, I can be social in groups I still feel uncomfortable in.

However, a deep part of me still just wants to be a loner, and I still go back to those roles constantly, in between my forays into the political scene.

I greatly enjoy this free-form, permanent-death RP enforced MUD. It's because it is all those things, and a social game, that I enjoy it. The text format helps to dumb down the feedback overload I get from socializing in real life (which is why LARP is not an option for me, and just strikes me as a nightmare). The risk of permanent death, that I might lose all that I worked for, is why it is especially enjoyable. I'd play more pen and paper but I can't keep a group or stay in one.
Useful tips: Commands |  |Storytelling:  1  2

Cind

  • Posts: 1689
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2018, 12:08:52 AM »
It's harder to trust someone who doesn't need anything from you. That need, that interdependency builds trust that is far more difficult to attain once your PC is a badass. No one trusts a badass.

Ah, this brings back memories. Playing a person in need is usually temporary for me (and everyone else) and its in that transitional period that the best friends are often made. Nothing brings people together like need--- especially people from different parts of the city or races, who if rich, would have a hard time finding reasons to trust each other.
Look, a petting tregil.  So silky...Feel him.

Heade

  • Posts: 675
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2018, 01:58:45 AM »
It's harder to trust someone who doesn't need anything from you. That need, that interdependency builds trust that is far more difficult to attain once your PC is a badass. No one trusts a badass.

Ah, this brings back memories. Playing a person in need is usually temporary for me (and everyone else) and its in that transitional period that the best friends are often made. Nothing brings people together like need--- especially people from different parts of the city or races, who if rich, would have a hard time finding reasons to trust each other.

Exactly.
I used to have a funny signature, but I felt like no one took me seriously, so it's time to put on my serious face.

Eyeball

  • Posts: 862
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2018, 03:38:56 AM »
In any case, I'm starting to get the impression that some sort of hole has been punched in parry/shield use/defense code-wise, so that a character is going to be taking a certain mount of hits no matter how skilled she is or who/what she's up against. If true, that means that the Age of Heroes is over, and all combat characters are vulnerable to simple attrition. No glorious one-man stands, just being somewhat better than the next guy at best.

Which would mean the last of the Achiever goals is dead. Congratulations, Social/Killer players, your victory is complete.

Dar

  • Posts: 1387
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2018, 04:31:39 AM »
I know the feeling "well" and often succumb to it myself. When I play leaderships, or resource rich characters, I often help others to break through that barrier by engaging them with some things whatever hooks they can later use while remaining loners until they decide they dont want to anymore. But yeah. I often have a temptation to stay loner with my characters.

Synthesis

  • Posts: 9671
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2018, 10:37:59 AM »
Personally, I kind of like coming in with a new PC and faking being a noob.
Quote from: WarriorPoet
I play this game to pretend to chop muthafuckaz up with bone swords.
Quote from: Smuz
I come to the GDB to roleplay being deep and wise.
Quote from: Vanth
Synthesis, you scare me a little bit.

Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2018, 10:45:26 AM »
Personally, I kind of like coming in with a new PC and faking being a noob.
You begin searching the area intently.
You look around, but don't find any large wood.
You think: "Story of my life."

Alesan

  • Posts: 255
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2018, 10:54:45 AM »
I don't have to fake it.


I'm definitely on the fence about the "newb" period on a new PC. My social game is not up to snuff, and so until those relationships start to form, which can take up to a month of RL time, I can get very frustrated with the game.

Because by and large, those chargen-dressed characters receive far less attention than someone who's amassed some gear and looks established, and has been around consistently for a certain amount of time.

TheWanderer

  • Posts: 1501
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2018, 12:12:45 PM »
In any case, I'm starting to get the impression that some sort of hole has been punched in parry/shield use/defense code-wise, so that a character is going to be taking a certain mount of hits no matter how skilled she is or who/what she's up against. If true, that means that the Age of Heroes is over, and all combat characters are vulnerable to simple attrition. No glorious one-man stands, just being somewhat better than the next guy at best.

Which would mean the last of the Achiever goals is dead. Congratulations, Social/Killer players, your victory is complete.

I, too, was critted. The Age of Heroes is truly over. All this relentless twinking is for naught.

On another note, can someone PM me directions to Cenyr??? All I see are dunes.
Quote
Whatever happens, happens.

Eyeball

  • Posts: 862
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2018, 01:26:39 PM »
I, too, was critted. The Age of Heroes is truly over. All this relentless twinking is for naught.

Yes, I figured someone would say this. To which the standard reply is, "why don't you go play a MUSH" if enjoying developing a codedly powerful character in a code-based game is synonymous with twinking.

EDIT: As it stands, commoners don't have much to strive for in the game. Money is useless to a commoner beyond a certain point. Status is capped at the Sergeant level for the most part. There's not a lot out on the sands to motivate exploration. And being codedly powerful seems to have been reduced as well. I guess there's the basic survival game left. How long can you go before you die in a Templar's mission, for example?
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 04:31:20 PM by Eyeball »

TheWanderer

  • Posts: 1501
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2018, 01:56:23 PM »
Eh. Dumb reply.

People prefer twinks and outwardly powerful characters in this setting because that coded power presents an advantage to be lorded over other players in a perma-death, storytelling environment. It's much more versatile and interesting here than anywhere else. It's one of the reasons Templar roles receive the most applications (I mean, aside from the fact that they're probably the best-implemented sponsor role).

I can see the appeal of doing it in this game (even if I'd personally want to dash my head against a wall if I gave it an attempt). I don't see the appeal in a MUSH.

Anyway, what you're talking about would just be hearsay. It's possible stuff's been quietly reduced so dwarves aren't solo killing meks! I dunno. It's always been a -little- jarring to meet warriors that casually solo kill everything in the world without breaking a sweat, though. Regardless, I assure you killing the social roles can be done with ease! So, uh, take solace in that?

OH, right. I forgot to stay on topic. Uh. Yeah, I commiserate with you folk and your social awkwardness when it comes to dealing with other socially awkward nerds. Much love.
Quote
Whatever happens, happens.

Marauder Moe

  • Posts: 12909
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2018, 03:03:17 PM »
I feel like Armageddon is partially a game where you need to make your own fun rather than rely on coded goals for your satisfaction.  If you can't have fun playing your character without money/rank/power/magick, you're not going to have fun with those things.


Anyway, I've never felt like I needed to skill-up before interacting.  The only times I feel "not ready" are when I haven't gotten a chance to go shopping yet, which is much less of a problem now that we have pretty well-stocked newbie shops. 

I've had pretty good success just jumping into conversations.  The key is playing it right.
*Don't TELL your backstory.  Don't even show it.  Just hint at it and make other characters pry for details.
*Converse with purpose.  Go in with a goal of obtaining some information; current Byn sergeants, safe/dangerous grebbing spots, templars to look out for, etc.
*Express strong opinions rather than seeking conformity.  Take a verbal shit on 'gickers/elves/breeds/whatever undesirables.  Decide that Allanak needs better bards. Remark about how the ale at this place tastes like dwarf-piss.  Talk about how nice it must be to work for House Fale.  Tell someone their cloak is ugly.

Bebop

  • Posts: 3781
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #20 on: December 05, 2018, 04:14:12 PM »
I play the game in a super social light.  I'm bored if there aren't social sparks flying.

On the flip side, sometimes I'm like ugh who are these virtual people?  I don't even like real people.  And it gets to be a bit much for me.  Usually at that point I try to find some way to jump the shark to get myself out of the funk.

But yeah, I can play any other video game for world, fps etc.  I go to Arm for the political intrigue and social aspect - playing different character styles and for the fun interactions.

Eyeball

  • Posts: 862
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2018, 04:33:04 PM »
Eh. Dumb reply.

People prefer twinks and outwardly powerful characters in this setting because that coded power presents an advantage to be lorded over other players in a perma-death, storytelling environment. It's much more versatile and interesting here than anywhere else. It's one of the reasons Templar roles receive the most applications (I mean, aside from the fact that they're probably the best-implemented sponsor role).

I can see the appeal of doing it in this game (even if I'd personally want to dash my head against a wall if I gave it an attempt). I don't see the appeal in a MUSH.

Anyway, what you're talking about would just be hearsay. It's possible stuff's been quietly reduced so dwarves aren't solo killing meks! I dunno. It's always been a -little- jarring to meet warriors that casually solo kill everything in the world without breaking a sweat, though. Regardless, I assure you killing the social roles can be done with ease! So, uh, take solace in that?

OH, right. I forgot to stay on topic. Uh. Yeah, I commiserate with you folk and your social awkwardness when it comes to dealing with other socially awkward nerds. Much love.

I hope you eat your wheaties tomorrow, or whatever else makes your day better for you.

TheWanderer

  • Posts: 1501
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #22 on: December 05, 2018, 05:40:56 PM »
Don't rankle on me. I think you're detecting more of a tone than I intended. That was a genuine response to your apparent frustration with others and their whole "go play a MUSH" bit, with my "dumb reply" line being directed at the bit. This game has qualities that make it inherently more interesting to be a maxed out character here than in some MUSH. Reasons listed were the honest truth, even if people don't like to admit it.

What conflicts between the two of us, I assume, is that I don't much care if people can't solo meks, bahamets, horrors, 30-man onslaughts, and so on. Those seem like party endeavors in a "grounded" fantasy setting. Or something done with some sweet ass magick effects.

But thank you! :) I hope you get some posts supporting your coded aspirations, or whatever else makes your day better for you in general.
Quote
Whatever happens, happens.

Synthesis

  • Posts: 9671
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2018, 05:53:36 PM »
Post-defense-nerf, warriors have never been bulletproof...and that was in like...2006.

I haven't played around enough with Enforcer/Raider/Fighter to say whether their top-tier defense matches up with where a top-tier warrior's was, but...beyond that, I don't know what you're getting at.  After September 2006, a top-tier warrior has -always- run the risk of a random headshot, even from a critter you could pwn 99% of the time.

I don't know of any ordinary PC that has legit soloed meks or silt-horrors post defense-nerf.  Both of those can land single hits for 100+ damage, and nobody's defense is good enough to make a living off that risk.  I had a dwarf ranger who could solo bahamets if he had to, but it was always a sketchy proposition, and bahamets are a lot less dangerous than mekillots and silt-horrors.  My 60-day warrior still occasionally had to flee from rantarri, gwoshi, tarantulas, tembo, dujats...depending on their stat roll.  (And trust me, once you kill enough of mob X, you can tell what their agility roll is within the first few rounds of combat, and you know their strength roll the first time it hits you.)  Since then, defense seems to have gotten another slight situational nerf, but...I'm still on the fence about whether what I'm seeing there is a real pattern or just data noise and misperception.
Quote from: WarriorPoet
I play this game to pretend to chop muthafuckaz up with bone swords.
Quote from: Smuz
I come to the GDB to roleplay being deep and wise.
Quote from: Vanth
Synthesis, you scare me a little bit.

Riev

  • Posts: 5187
Re: Armageddon is a Social game.
« Reply #24 on: December 07, 2018, 11:17:53 AM »
I was running the dungeons and dragons starter edition with a bunch of new players, and I was a first time GM, and the question came up then.
Why are these characters hanging around each other and why do they rescue each other?  Why don't they just run away and split up?
I didn't have a good answer, but I put this up to the players - it's a social game and we play together.  Make up your own reasons to be in this gang.
I wish I had better answers but this question as to why characters should play with each other still bothers me a bit

"Alright, so you're all in the bar. What do you do?"
"I go upstairs to my room, avoid everyone, and retire as a farmer."


But in reality, I have struggled with this before. There aren't really any "adventurer's guild" places, or standard quests. Arm isn't like DnDů you're not playing the level 10 fighter in a world of level 1 NPCs. You're not a special character because you're a PC vs and NPC. The lore of the game states that every character, (v)NPC or not, has the same stat ranges, abilities, and potential.

Which to me, means Arm is a Social Game as OP mentioned, moreso than a text based Dungeons and Dragons game. Sure you can skill up and git tuff, but it doesn't mean anything. You're not being hired to kill that wyvern that has been plaguing the trade routes established in Mal Krian. You're not in a group of people who need to investigate a new system of tunnels opened up by a recent salt worm.

Those are best left to the NPCs of standing. Go get their water, slave.
Masks are the Armageddon equivalent of Ed Hardy shirts.