Request For Feedback

[ale six]

After a while of having a certain staffer animate an npc for me, I begin to get used to their style and enjoy it - so much that when some other staffer animates the npc, even if there's no loss of information, the simple things like changes in emote and speech patterns get jarring for me.

Is there really a legitimate issue over stagnation in clans if staff stick around them for too long? I wouldn't have expected anything like that. Call me idealistic, but I also thought the staff cooperated up there among plotlines - just because one imm is the listed contact for one clan, I didn't think they were the only one who had a say over what plots got run and what affected their clan.

It feels like some people think certain imms are out to get them and happily munch on their characters if their PCs try and betray their clan. Is that really true? Even if it was, I don't see how rotating people around would fix it.

And also... suppose certain players didn't get along with certain staff for whatever reason. As it is now, if you feel like Halaster is out to kill all your pcs, you can just avoid his one or two clans and be okay. But if imms rotate, you might join a certain clan with imms you like, and then a few months later, people shift... and look out! It's Halaster coming to get you!

I'm still pretty happy with how things are.

[Larrath]

A note for this entire post - everything I say here is based wholly on my opinions and personal impressions.  It's very possible that I'm completely mistaken in many points I raise here, and no offense is intended for anyone at all.

In an ideal world, I'd like to see one or two staffers assigned permanently to each clan, and maybe have a rotation of other staffers among the other clans.

There are two major problems that make this solution not probable:
First, some clans are more popular than other clans.  If there were lists where staffers had to sign in their names in order to be assigned to them, the Arm of the Dragon would probably get a dozen candidates while the Soh Lanah Kah d-elf tribe, or House Kadius, would probably get four (if even that).  Some clans are more popular than other clans - this is true with players and I'm sure that it's also true with staffers.  To remedy this, the less popular clans need to be looked at, and possibly even be redesigned until they become sufficiently awesome.

The second major problem is favoritism.  However, I think it's a big mistake to say "each staffer will only have X months in charge of the clan so they don't develop favoritism".  The problem with favoritism is that, at least to some level, it's actually allowed to exist.  There needs to be some method to seriously bring favoritism under control.
I'm of the opinion that if a staff member abuses OOC information in order to benefit their favorite clan, they simply have no place being a staff member.

So how can favoritism be brought under control?  Maybe a Highlord-level staffer can play police officer.  Maybe Storytellers can be required to post a summary or a report every X days or whenever they are involved in any PC death, or whenever a plot ends.
None of these ideas seem perfect (or even very good) to me, but the fact stands - the problem isn't that some staff members can develop unfair favoritism for their clan.
The problem is that favoritism can exist and pass mostly undetected.  This is what needs to be fixed.  Favoritism extends beyond clan assignments, and without favoritism, the suggested form of clan rotations wouldn't be needed.

[Anonymous]

As a player I hate clan leadership turnover with a passion, especially with a long-lived character because management styles and goals are never consistent from one immortal to the next.  It's frustrating in the extreme to have an NPC treat and expect certain things from you one day and then two months later the same guy is completely different.

Even if the staffmember creates their own NPC to oversee things you still have a number of differences in how your interaction with the immortal themselves differs.  This is only a major factor when you've been having weekly interactions with the same immortal for a year.  Then, pop, someone new comes onto the scene looking to make their mark or change some of the clan's direction and you are left feeling very uprooted.

Changes in clan leadership are easily one of the most negative experiences I've had in this game.

[FightClub]

Maybe keeping the staff members who are primarily assigned to run the clan in place, while having a few staff members who rotate from clan to clan, taking on certain roles would be a good idea.

The thought of a clan losing its primary imm every so often, seems to be a bit too much.

Not to mention how mad players might get if the immortal in rotation to your clan was away on vacation for the duration of this, and ideas that were in current progress get deturred until next cycle...

Not enough pro's and too many con's in my opinion.

[UnderSeven]

My experience when staff rotate naturally, is that clans can get messed up.  When I encountered three differnet staff on the clan I was playing, I would say it literally destroyed my character.  All three staff had different ideas for how the clan should work, all three played the leader npcs who ordered my pc around differently. All three viewed my pc differently.  It was impossible to play and made me hate it every second.  

Favoritism maybe something we'll just have to live with, having two staff, where one rotates and the other doesn't might work, but a complete clean slate rotation..?  Might as well just kick all the pcs out of the clan at the same time while we're at it.

[spawnloser]

Doomsayers, chill.  There are ways to minimize the shock of the staff shifting around the clans.  I still say we do it.

Just because something didn't work once when it was probably not a scheduled and planned for thing...?  I mean, come on.  If it is well planned for, I think it'll be fine.

[bloodfromstone]

I personally really like having clan imms that I 'know' from the get go, and that learn to know my character and me. I don't really like the idea, but I'll deal with whatever.

[vissa]

I only have one real concern.  Some staff will give sponsored roles to off-peak players and some won't.  What happens to off-peak sponsored players in a clan when the former type of staff member is replaced by the latter?  And as the proposed changes will make this situation inevitable (as long as the sponsored character stays alive long enough), will all staff be less likely to give those roles to off-peak players as a result?

[Akaramu]

I only have one real concern.  Some staff will give sponsored roles to off-peak players and some won't.  What happens to off-peak sponsored players in a clan when the former type of staff member is replaced by the latter?  And as the proposed changes will make this situation inevitable (as long as the sponsored character stays alive long enough), will all staff be less likely to give those roles to off-peak players as a result?

A very valid concern. Having been in a leadership role at off-peak, I have to say I dont like the idea.

[Morfeus]

Just because something didn't work once when it was probably not a scheduled and planned for thing...?  I mean, come on.  If it is well planned for, I think it'll be fine.

Rereading the thread, it looks to me it happened more than once. Actually, I am surprised to see how many people were frustrated by such thing in the past and it just makes me more sure I don't like the idea.

[ShaiHulud]

I've been in two clans in the past that played musical immortals during the time I was involved in long term leadership roles in them.  I have to say it sucked.

[Intrepid]

Looking over the idea, it does seem to be a fresh approach to the situation
it's trying to solve, but the end result is that it's treating the symptoms
rather than providing a cure.  If a staff member is attached to one clan,
he/she will become attached to the next or become disinterested in that
clan's upkeep until a more "interesting" clan comes along.  I'm not saying
that this thinking happens among the staff, mind you, I'm just following
this line of thinking along a logical path.

All the Pros listed seem, in my opinion at least, to be things that can be
done even with the same imms running the clan without rotation.

The main Con that bothers me is the loss of continuity, which I believe to
be an irreparable problem even with a staggered system and massive
prep time.

[spawnloser]

I've been in a clan that had musical immortals too, and yes, it did suck.  Wanna know what, though?  I still think this will work with the proper implementation.

[Angela Christine]

Part of the problem with "musical immortals" is probably that it was not planned long in advance, it might work better if the rotation was part of the system.  With a planned, systemic rotation the staff involved would know that it was going to happen months in advance, and have plenty of time to get their paperwork (or electronic equivalent) in order.  Planned rotations might actually make the unavoidable abrupt changes that happen from time to time go more smoothly, because there would be a system in place for handing over the responsibility.  

I've heard that the greatest accomplishment of democracy is that it provides for the smooth transfer of power.  A dictator can be a very good leader, and can easily be more effective than a bunch of argumentative elected officials who are more concerned with getting re-elected in the short term than the long-term good of the country.  But when the charismatic dictator dies everything goes to shit as the various factions struggle for power.  A dictator who comes to power through revolution or coup leaves no legitimate way to transfer that power.  Even a long-standing monarchy is prone to periodic scuffles or civil wars when various heirs disagree or the reigning monarch is loony enough to inspire an insurrection.  Democracy has a handy method for transferring power and it is practiced at regular intervals, so if a leader does suddenly die or become unable to continue his duties we still don't get a civil war, some other guy steps up on an interim basis until the next election.  Life continues as normal.

Hopefully clan leadership never goes through coups or revolutions.    But practicing transferring leadership when it is not urgent can make it easier to transfer leadership when something unfortunate happens and the leader has to leave abruptly.


I like one year terms for clan imms.


Angela Christine

[EvilRoeSlade]

The main Con that bothers me is the loss of continuity, which I believe to be an irreparable problem even with a staggered system and massive prep time.

It's far from irreparable.  An immortal can keep a written detail on a certain NPCs personality and his dealings with various PCs, so it would be easy for the next immortal to pick up at the same place.  By utilizing the biography feature, this becomes simple and easy.

The same thing can be done for plotlines.

I don't doubt there have been many bad experiences with sudden shifts in immortals.  But Angela Christine is correct.  The reason that those experiences were bad was precisely because they were unplanned for.  An immortal suddenly retires, a clan is suddenly in limbo, and the new immortal comes on the scene with only fragmented knowledge of what went on prior to her arrival.  This is a problem.  A current problem that we are facing now.

People argue against this proposition because they don't like change.  Nobody does, it's human nature.  But a change in clan immortals will be a fact for clanned players in Armageddon even if this change does not occur.  This is simply a way to make it more smooth and graceful, and thus eliminating the stress that change can cause for both players and immortals.

[X-D]

I've (with one exception) never been in a clan that had the same imms at the end of my time there that it had at the beginning.

I have been in clans with multiple shifts, and yes, it was annoying, but I saw it only so because it was unplanned, nothing was in place to help the new imm with continuity or anything, I got the feeling that the imms was Tossed into the position with a simple, "heres the docs, sink or swim"

I think that planned rotations would actually, in the long run solve this problem.

First, help would be in place.
Second an unscheduled change would be handled much more smoothly since most likley one staffer with some exp with that clan would still be there.
Third, Odds are, on an unscheduled change, you would be able to find a staffer with exp in that clan because of rotation to fill the spot smoothly..

Fact is, staff changes happen all the time already.

Will there be problems, sure. but I think the long term benefits far outway them.

[ShaiHulud]

I've been in a clan that had musical immortals too, and yes, it did suck.  Wanna know what, though?  I still think this will work with the proper implementation.

You're right.  I don't think the changes I experienced in the past were intended, but of necessity.  A planned change would be better.  No fault.
I like the idea.

Versatility of staff
Staff don't get bored
new/fresh perceptions to clans
players are involved with more staff
staff are involved with more players
If one imm don't like me...stick around he'll be gone in six months? *joke*