Roleplaying Peeves

[Qzzrbl]

I'm pretty sure that was used as an example.

That was just an example. I actually have no idea what's even ON the Drovian spell list.

....Oh.   

[Little Darkness]

One reason I don't play gemmers.   

Maybe I am wrong to view it this way, but I see 'magick' as a science in Zalanthas.  It certainly behaves like a pseudo-science in that one learns and accomplishes incredible feats of altering/affecting the world through trial and error.  Instead of viewing the magick system as 'dead mechanics', I try to treat it as a living system.  There are natural laws governing magick in Zalanthas just like there are for anything.

For someone who understands (to an extent) the system, predicting potential outcomes is possible.  An elementalist 'master' might know what is possible for his or her students to learn and how best to 'guide' them toward that understanding.  A Templar might know what is possible from past experience with mages of the same element, but that doesn't make them an expert in how an elementalist might achieve the desired knowledge.

Elementalists are what they are because of their 'gift' and there is a defined approach to understanding it.  Anyone might -learn- how magick works, and some few might actually learn to use it, but that is NOT elementalism.  That's sorcery.  According to the documentation on sorcery, one doesn't have to be a 'wizard' to learn a spell or two.

[Elgiva]

I'd actually like if magicks are not viewed as set-in-stone list of spells. I mean, yeah. A templar might demand anything. S/he might also demand a commoner to go and grow second head. But IMHO it would be cool if each Gemmer is taken as an individual with own list of spells ICly (no matter OOCly their spell-tree is the same). One Drovian might know "shade" and second might know "the ultra deadly spell of doom" and it would be nice if nobody expects one to learn others proficiency. It's a little like if you know your Sergeant is a code-eise warrior-guild and you demand him to learn use clubs (or something really unusual - for example whips), because you know your other Sergeant uses them and it's useful sometime. Hey, he might be the best sword-master in the whole city, does his lack of knowledge about clubs (whips) means he is useles and should change his approach? Wouldn't be better to send club-using Sergeant for club-needing works and send the sword-using Sergeant to jobs which require swords instead of trying to make them both to be masters of boths?

Indeed, I never saw anyone demanding a warrior to learn skill XX. I just saw Templars demanding Gemmers to learn spell YY. I understand where it comes from... but I still think it's better not to fall into this trap.

I'm not saying templars do anything -wrong- in what they do. As I said, IMO, Templars could demand... whatever they want to demand. I'm just sharing my own opinion on this matter.

[Lizzie]

I don't think a random spell list would be very useful to elementalists at all. A vivaduan who can dry up all the water in an oasis, but can't produce his own water? A stone mage who can cast avalanche, but can't make his own mount?

Elementalists are non-random in their lists for a reason. It's for playability. If you were to randomize the lists, you might as well do the same for rangers. Make it so that you have no way of knowing if your ranger character will -ever- learn how to ride a mount, and that one ranger will learn how to use a bow and another won't. Then move on to pickpockets - some will learn how to steal, others won't. How about assassins? Have it random so some learn poison, others learn bandage, and yet others learn backstab, but you never know which of these skills you -won't- have.

See, it's pretty silly when you apply this to other classes. It takes the playability out of them. Elementalists are very very limited as to the skills they are capable of achieving. Mostly, they ARE their spell list, and their subguild. They aren't much of anything else. Other guilds have various weapon types, fighting styles, defensive measures, perception skills, etc. etc. etc. Elementalists don't have all that, except when their spell lists gives it to them by way of the spells themselves. If you take away their spell list and turn it random, you end up with a character that no one will want to try, because they are functionally (codewise) unplayable.

[Dusky]

It would possibly be more interesting if characters had to earn their individual spells from the elements or mentors - perhaps either changing the teaching command in this case to impart new knowledge to the character in question.

Perhaps magickers could be granted spells for good works (as the element / mentor sees it), the level of trust the mentor / elementalist has in the underling.

This would also serve to "randomize" the spell list to a degree - though one would expect that the least of all Water mages would likely be able to fill a skin of water.

(As an aside changing things up so the summoning water was one of the most difficult spells and hugely impressive would be cool.)

This idea would have the added benefit of enhancing the roleplay between mentors and teachers, seeking and questing teachers, and developing plot lines as students struggle to increase themselves in the eyes of their masters.

Very cool stuff. You would also have magickers really pissed off when you killed their teachers.  =) 

AND if someone knows that Mad Sorcerer of the Night had the Shadow of Doom spell and that it was very rare, killing him might just ACTUALLY rid the world of the risk.  At least until another mage sold his soul to Drov for the knowledge.

Negatives to this idea that I can think of include losing common knowledge to the player base (suddenly no one can teach the "darkness" spell because as the Pbase fluctuates the last person who knew it was killed and increased staff interaction required (this is a negative?) to make sure certain spell lines were always available.

[Elgiva]

I actually didn't mean that spell-tree of magickers should be random. I meant that while you OOCly know there are certain spells on the tree, it should not mean that this certain PC you know -has to- achieve the spell (just because you OOCly know he can). Maybe he focuses on other spells? Maybe this certain elementalist can't get the spell at all, because his "gift" isn't big enough to allow him to gain The Super Secret Spell of Doom? Maybe he won't ever know more than three four spells? I mean, it's a talent. One can be talented more than the other one. You can't really demand him to be -more- talented and expect it to happen, hm? Well, alright, you can demand. But I was trying to point out it would be cool if magickers are not viewed as "bunch of spells", but more like people with certain talent/taint/curse - which might come with certain spells... or not.

I was pointing out it would be nice if approach of some PCs change... not that the code should change.

[TripleX]

Maybe this certain elementalist can't get the spell at all, because his "gift" isn't big enough to allow him to gain The Super Secret Spell of Doom? Maybe he won't ever know more than three four spells?

We all know that every elementalist gets the same spells due to the static spell coding system -- I wonder if there ever was a magicker that stopped practicing his spells after he has learned 5-6 spells for the better good of RP  as if he has reached his maximum 'gift' limit

[TripleX]

One more thing I wanted to add -- I saw that there are several players who dislike bad grammar or poor emotes -- I myself am not american, and english is not my primary language, but thanks to the wonderful world of Armageddon I've learned english over the years ever since I started to play the mud.

My emotes are still poor due to lack of vocabulary -- I just want to say to those who dislike poor emotes, or bad grammar ... I have no intention in ruining your gameplay, I just want to have fun and enjoy the game as much as you do, I just do it in the best way that I know and I try to improve my english as I go bye, tolerance toward that would be much appreciated

P.S. If I made any grammar typos in this post, let me know

[Troicha]

P.S. If I made any grammar typos in this post, let me know

I just want to have fun and enjoy the game as much as you do, I just do it in the best way that I know and I try to improve my English as I go by, tolerance toward that would be much appreciated.

You asked, otherwise I wouldn't have. I love international players, from whom typos and the like do not bother me. I'll even give explanation for the above corrections if you like.

[staggerlee]

Judging from your post you'll do just fine.

Just play the game, and if someone out there wets them self every time you make a typo, that's their problem.  You look like you'd do just fine, and as long as you don't do anything so jarring it disrupts the experience of those around you nobody has any right to complain at all. 

I've yet to get negative account notes for a misplaced semi-colon.   

[Malken]

Hey, TripleX, I'm just like you! Don't feel bad about it, Armageddon is probably the best thing that happened to me, language-wise. There's nothing better than speaking with someone and they tell you something like, "Really? I never would have guessed that english is your second (or third, if you're like me) language."

[Elgiva]

Maybe this certain elementalist can't get the spell at all, because his "gift" isn't big enough to allow him to gain The Super Secret Spell of Doom? Maybe he won't ever know more than three four spells?

We all know that every elementalist gets the same spells due to the static spell coding system -- I wonder if there ever was a magicker that stopped practicing his spells after he has learned 5-6 spells for the better good of RP  as if he has reached his maximum 'gift' limit

My problem is that knowledge about static spell coding system looks as OOC knowledge to me. And also, we have the similar knowledge about rangers or warriors... but nobody asks them to branch certain skill.

Additionally - I'm not sure if any stopped practicing spells because of this reason, but I remember more than one fairly long living magicker who had not more than basic spells.

[staggerlee]

And also, we have the similar knowledge about rangers or warriors... but nobody asks them to branch certain skill.

I'm not sure that's necessarily true.  I've seen people be instructed in particular methods of combat, be it to use a shield or try to knock someone off their feet.   I think it's perfectly reasonable as a leader character to be able to expect people serving under you to attempt to learn particular techniques, whether or not you think oocly they're set up to learn it.

If your templar had a krathi pet that lit people's toes on fire during interrogation, he may ask the guy's replacement to try something similar. If your sergeant wants you to fight as a cohesive unit with shields, he'll ask you to pick up as a shield regardless of whether you're a ranger or a warrior.

[Elgiva]

I see a difference between "practice <this> to serve better" and constant questions "are you finally able to do <that>?" Would you keep asking your new recruit-warrior if he is finally able to navigate in the sandstorm? No, because you OOCly know he possibly can't. Will you demand your recruit to finally learn poisoning arrows? Will you be annoyed your Sergeant doesn't use one of that super-special weapons and demand him to learn it, asking every other day if he finally did? Maybe, I myself never saw that IG - but I saw plenty of templars asking Gemmers again and again if they are finally able to cast <whatever>. I don't know, it's simply something what made my playing of Gemmer (years ago) less enjoyable than it could had been - I felt sentenced to sit in the Temple and cast-cast-cast just to branch-branch-branch (and when I did, I was blamed by other player I do nothing else than that).

[Dusky]

This is true - I've had warriors and rangers expected to learn specific skills and magickers, in fact, as well.  I don't see this as bad role play if the person doing the expecting has knowledge.

For example, a Templar who has ten, twenty years of exposure to elementalists (and might even have some of the spells) may expect that a certain type of mage can do a certain thing or know a direction of study that a particular mage should take to benefit the templar.

This is the same as a Lord (who may or not be experienced in combat) might expect his warrior bodyguards to be able to guard him or rescue him.  This is not unreasonable in my book.

[Fathi]

One more thing I wanted to add -- I saw that there are several players who dislike bad grammar or poor emotes -- I myself am not american, and english is not my primary language, but thanks to the wonderful world of Armageddon I've learned english over the years ever since I started to play the mud.

My emotes are still poor due to lack of vocabulary -- I just want to say to those who dislike poor emotes, or bad grammar ... I have no intention in ruining your gameplay, I just want to have fun and enjoy the game as much as you do, I just do it in the best way that I know and I try to improve my english as I go bye, tolerance toward that would be much appreciated

P.S. If I made any grammar typos in this post, let me know

You're doing just fine. Armageddon is a great place to learn English better; I know it's improved mine.

My complaints about grammar/punctuation are more against obvious laziness.

It doesn't matter what language somebody speaks natively--if you know enough English to apply for a PC and get them accepted on Armageddon, you know that sentences start with a capital letter and end with some form of punctuation mark. Yet several characters my PC has met never bother doing these things. It's laziness and it's irritating. :/

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

One of the things people really trip on is guild sniffing. I can half-way understand this, but when I ask if you can do this, and you say, I sorta know how, or I can learn that later, don't be pissy if I expect you to know it at some point during your career.

[Dusky]

One of the things people really trip on is guild sniffing. I can half-way understand this, but when I ask if you can do this, and you say, I sorta know how, or I can learn that later, don't be pissy if I expect you to know it at some point during your career.

...and I wonder if this is really guild sniffing.  I mean if you want someone who can speak Cavalish fluently or knows how to track a Vestric, you should ask, right?  I mean, you wouldn't exactly hire me to do carpentry around your house, but maybe you would if you needed a website or something.  Is that guild sniffing? 

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Well, it gets construed as guild sniffing, which, if you are addressing underlings, I really don't see as being that bad. You need to know what you people can do, absolutely, and that sorta means you need to understand what their talents are. If I ask you if you know how to guard a man's ass, and you say yeh, and then you never ever ever manage to guard me, I am going to kick in the side of your head. If I give you a bow and tell you that this is the weapon we use, get used to it, and you say ok but never do, I am going to kick in your head.

[staggerlee]

On the flip side of that coin, I'd imagine most player leaders would be understanding if they saw you practicing every damn day with that bow and never quite getting it.  Within limits of course, since as a leader they may eventually have to accept that your strengths lie in other areas or that you'll just never be the archer Amos was.

One thing that's really impressed me about the leaders of this game is that it really seems that they value reliable, intelligent people over skills. I realize that someone probably disagrees with that, and that's fine.

[Gimfalisette]

Magickers and mundanes alike should also realize that if a leader-type person is asking you to learn <blah>, it's possible that in part they are thinking of YOU and YOUR FUN. Some skills are more useful than others, thus some skills will allow you to be used more frequently, and that means more character interaction, more plot involvement, and probably more rewards for your character. Finding a real use for a newbie <any guild here> is quite difficult, so leaders will look for training directions you can take in order to become more involved.

[Lizzie]

I once played a Sergeant, and I would ask EVERY recruit if they had a hobby. Was I trying to find out their subguild? Nope. I was trying to find out what my character would recommend they do, on days when there was no one to spar with. If some new recruit said they had a knack for leatherwork, I'd be -delighted- to show them where to find hides in the barracks, and give them their very own leatherworking knife or hide scraper. I'd even suggest to them that I was fine with them using downtime to make helmets for the unit and he'd get a bonus if he could make more than he ruined using the House raw materials.

If he said he liked carving up rocks, I'd GLADLY rid the store room of the 4,000,000 pounds of jasper by encouraging him to have fun destroying them all.

And so on and so forth. It wasn't to be a guild sniffer, it was to make sure he had some use for -whatever- subguild his player picked, and that he had something to keep him busy and not too bored when no one was around to interact with him.

What used to bug me, as the player of that Sergeant, was when I'd ask if they had a hobby and they'd hem and haw and deliberately not answer the question. If you picked a subguild that you didn't want your sarge to know about, or didn't want to divulge yet, it's SO easy to just say "nope, no hobbies." Of course then you'd need to accept that your Sarge has NOT authorized you to do any crafting, because you told her you don't have any of those kinds of interests or talents. And then you'd have to accept the IC consequences if you got caught in the crafting hall working with hides when you were supposed to be solo-RPing in the sparring circle

[Ocotillo]

Magickers and mundanes alike should also realize that if a leader-type person is asking you to learn <blah>, it's possible that in part they are thinking of YOU and YOUR FUN. Some skills are more useful than others, thus some skills will allow you to be used more frequently, and that means more character interaction, more plot involvement, and probably more rewards for your character. Finding a real use for a newbie <any guild here> is quite difficult, so leaders will look for training directions you can take in order to become more involved.

No. I really think it was out of line for my commanding templar to tell me, a member of a cavalry unit, to learn how to ride a sunlon.

Absolutely ridiculous. I don't understand why people play this game. Do they want to spoil all the joy I get from discovering that I can learn to ride on my own?

[Adiadochokinesis]

What is a sunlon?

Why are you ruining my immersion?!

[BuNutzCola]

As to guild sniffing, it is really annoying sometimes how people are so against it. Blatant, obvious guild-sniffing is a bad thing, I'd agree. But for all you folks who cry when an employer tries to at least get some idea what you're capable of, at least try to come up with something useful to market yourself. I can't say how many times I've had to deal with this situation as a pc recruiter for my clan.

Amos: Hello, I would like to work for X.

Me: Oh yeah? We'll we're always lookin' for fine folks. What do you have to offer to the team?

Amos: Well I thought I could be an agent.

Me: Well typically we don't hire straight into that position, have any applicable skills we can make use of to get you to a place you can work for that?

Amos: Well uh, I am a pretty good cook. ((I've met more cooks than ANYTHING else)

Me: Ah, well we've got cooks on staff already, any good with your hands?

Amos: I can make arrows.

Me: What about a blade, any good?

Amos: I never really had the knack

Me: No trouble, not for everyone. Fletcher's aren't quite what we're looking for.

Amos: I have good ears.

Me: Oh yeah? They are quite nice and round, lad. But again, mostly just looking for handimen'er hunters. Anything else that makes it worth my time to bring you on?

Amos: I uh...umm.

At this point I can guess they might be a magicker. Folks might call it guild sniffing, but myself, and many other leadership PC's have been through it over and over, and at least ICly I find myself tired of hiring on one-trick ponies, having been shown time and time again in game they aren't worth the trouble, and OOCly knowing it's just another thief or magicker wanting to get in. As a concession, half the time I take on these employees knowing almost for a fact OOC they are thieves or 'gickers, but at the same time knowing they need an environment to play in,  even if it just becomes a method for my character to earn the trust of and then eliminate these wretches.