Preserving the Wonder and Mystery

[Gimfalisette]

A list of suggestions to the ARM playerbase as a whole. Recently I am feeling really bummed out about our rampant spread of IC information by OOC means. Game secrets, character secrets, all kinds of stuff. I think we need to rein ourselves in and commit to curbing the spread.

-- Even if you, the player, know that a certain type or category of character might have the powers of a sorceror, mindbender, or some other high-karma thing, don't let your new character know it, if they have no 100% solid IC reason to have to know it. Yes, that means your character will be bumbling around and probably exposed to IC problems/consequences. It also means you won't be leaking that information to newer players without good reason to do so.

-- Really, that goes for any game secret or nuance. If your new character doesn't HAVE to know it, don't let them know it! Yes, even though you might have played in Tuluk for a year and know exactly how to interact with Tuluki nobles, this means your Allanaki character might go to Tuluk and totally screw up!

-- Every time you post on the forums about something that's not in the help files, ask yourself, "Am I potentially ruining a newbie's fun of finding out IC, by posting this?" If the answer is, "Yes," then please stop yourself from posting.

-- Consider the possibility that you, as a veteran player, are more than a little jaded about what is IC and what is OOC transmission of information. Pull back a bit and look at ARM as a precious thing that should be found out about IC not because you're hoarding and think you're "elite," but because it is so much more mind-bogglingly awesome and fun and immersive to find out things IC.

-- Don't post stuff on the forums that clearly identifies what character you're playing. Maybe you don't really care, but other players do not necessarily want to know who your character is, because it could possibly nudge IC situations one direction or another, even unconsciously.

-- Don't ask people stuff on IM, or on PM, or on the forums, about IC stuff. Just commit to not doing it. If you think someone might say "find out IC," then don't ask in the first place. Then you are not tempting/encouraging other players to spread OOC info.

-- If there's someone on your IM list who you talk to and who consistently leaks IC info to you, the next time they start to do it, gently say to them, "Please do not tell me IC info." Yes, you can resist the temptation even to hear IC stuff! Most people I've said this to respond really well to it.

-- If there's someone you talk to on IM who asks you for IC information, tell them to find out IC. If you already tell them that sometimes but not always, tell them more often. Become more firm in your discipline on this.

-- If all else fails, stop talking to people who aren't careful with IC info.

-- If someone offers to email you "that map that everyone has," say no, you don't want it. If you already have that map, delete it.

-- Assume that everyone playing loves the game and has as much care for it as you do. We all need the reminder to "find out IC" at times. Assume that anyone who's saying this to you, just wants the most fun possible for you.

Anyone else have suggestions? I know there are some things I need to do better myself. I am committing to doing better and helping keep down the OOC info spread. I want to preserve the wonder and mystery both for myself, and for everyone around me, especially noobs.

[staggerlee]

I think that considering what your character would and would not know, even to the extent of making big ic mistakes goes a long way.

If you're playing a desert elf and wander into Nak, feel free to get lost, sit in the wrong tavern or have no idea what a "metaphor" is or what the word "perjury" means. 

We've got a lot of very educated players, with a very strong knowledge of both the game world and the real world.  Before you use a concept, be it logical, philosophical, knowledge based, or anything, consider where your character is from and what they'd know.

[LoD]

Another pitfall to avoid is assuming that everyone knows what you know.  It's difficult for veterans who have played the game for years and years to separate what is common knowledge and what is actually rare knowledge they've simply learned over the years and now seems common.

Even innocent statements like, "You know that tower at the base of those cliffs in that place, right?" or "Man I hate that stupid bamuk rabies bite." can ruin the mystery and joy of discovery for players who haven't shared your same set of experiences.

You may think everybody has experienced, learned, seen, heard of, or witnessed somewhere, someone, or something in game, but assume they haven't and you'll probably be more accurate.  I've also seen quite a lot of referencing IC information using the Armageddon Documentation as a pseudo-reference.  The documentation might read something like, "Day'Quill is a mild poison rumored to cause drowsiness and sometimes used to combat aches and pains.  It is often derived from greenish plants with dots or marks."  That doesn't mean you can go around making statements such as, "The greenish leaves with red spots are Day'Quill." or "I've tried poisoning people with Day'Quill through water, food, and weapons and nothing seems to make them fall asleep!"

Err on the side of caution.  Assume nobody else knows about these things and purposefully be vague and ambiguous out of courtesy for those players visiting the GDB that don't already know the information you're providing.

If you're ever unsure, email the mud account instead of posting on the GDB.

-LoD

[Naox]

I can't begin to tell you how much I appreciate this post. It's really encouraging to see players involved in this. Grow little post, grow.

[staggerlee]

Another pitfall to avoid is assuming that everyone knows what you know.  It's difficult for veterans who have played the game for years and years to separate what is common knowledge and what is actually rare knowledge they've simply learned over the years and now seems common.

Even innocent statements like, "You know that tower at the base of those cliffs in that place, right?" or "Man I hate that stupid bamuk rabies bite." can ruin the mystery and joy of discovery for players who haven't shared your same set of experiences.

You may think everybody has experienced, learned, seen, heard of, or witnessed somewhere, someone, or something in game, but assume they haven't and you'll probably be more accurate.  I've also seen quite a lot of referencing IC information using the Armageddon Documentation as a pseudo-reference.  The documentation might read something like, "Day'Quill is a mild poison rumored to cause drowsiness and sometimes used to combat aches and pains.  It is often derived from greenish plants with dots or marks."  That doesn't mean you can go around making statements such as, "The greenish leaves with red spots are Day'Quill." or "I've tried poisoning people with Day'Quill through water, food, and weapons and nothing seems to make them fall asleep!"

Err on the side of caution.  Assume nobody else knows about these things and purposefully be vague and ambiguous out of courtesy for those players visiting the GDB that don't already know the information you're providing.

If you're ever unsure, email the mud account instead of posting on the GDB.

-LoD

I think that your poison example strikes a very, very important point. Just because it's in the documentation doesn't mean that your character knows it, or that it still wouldn't be fun to find out ic.  There's a lot of stuff that I've had people teach my characters in game, much to my fascination and delight, and then much later found while reading a doc.   

It's so much more fun to get hit with a poison arrow and then have the medic explaining it to you while they patch you up than to get hit with a poison arrow, type help poison, and contact everyone you know asking for the ____ that will cure _____.

There are documents I still haven't read, in part because I just don't want to find out that way. 

[RogueGunslinger]

>em blows softly onto the embers.

I agree. I have had a few extremely Wow moments lately... Things that I just didn't even begin to imagine were in the game... And I want everyone to experience those things IC.

[Tisiphone]

This should be GDB mantra.

Further, a point about arguments/discussions on the GDB: you don't always have to be right, especially not at the expense of IC info. Fictional example: perhaps someone thinks rangers should be able to ambush animals and get huge combat bonuses against them dependent on ride skill. Perhaps another person thinks that's silly, and that combat shouldn't take into account types of opponent or ride skill. Enter you; you've maxed out a ranger at 382 days played, and you know for a fact that 'ambush animal' branches from maxed ride.

Leave the conversation alone. The spread of ignorance about the game is fine; the spread of knowledge is not.

[Fathi]

Older players, when talking to newer players, don't make "find out IC" sound like a punishment or a reprimand.

Explain and emphasise the reasons why secrets are important and fun.

Don't just brush somebody off with a "find out IC" that comes off sounding more like "I had it hard as a noob and you should, too."

Newer players, realise that getting a "find out IC" answer does NOT mean you're screwing up or you tried to break the rules. Don't take it as though you're being scolded.

[Maybe42or54]

Well, for the most part Gimf, I agree. However, if some questions aren't asked, and ideas that -sound- like they'd be in the game, aren't in the game, then they will never be implemented.

For example: The recent ride update. I always thought terrain, mount, speed, etc affected if your mount moved or not, but up until that post, and Morgenes' actions, it wasn't. I remember asking IG when I was newbie if it was easier to ride on the north road than the wastes, and was told that, yes, it was easier. It -sounds- like it'd be easier, but up until Morg, it wasn't.

Rarsh brought up the idea it would be cool if shields could block arrows, and he was told to find out IC and yes, you could. Oddly enough, I was told the same thing OOC when I was newer. Eight months after being told, I witnessed it, did I say "Knew that was going to happen.. Bleh." No... I'm like "Mother fucker! holy shit! Look at that guy, practically just walking through the wall of arrows! He is a bonafide badass." It still amazes me when that happens. More questions = More ideas

Another problem, I completely agree with, that you said, is that players need to know when to take Information their character would know and -not- use it IG. That is a player responsibility that is heavily lacking. I see this all the time, "I knew this, that, and thet character, they were badass." "And your character, GDB_name, was fucking sweet also." That IMHO, happens way too much. When that happens, I've noticed you'll see the same group of people in the same clans on different occasions, or their PCs will be in the same social circle. Since the players know each other, the players don't want to do anything IC that would totally ruin the other character, even if it is IC. That is one of my biggest peeves.

[Seeker]

Archive quality, Gimf.


Seeker

[Tisiphone]

Well, for the most part Gimf, I agree. However, if some questions aren't asked, and ideas that -sound- like they'd be in the game, aren't in the game, then they will never be implemented.

For example: The recent ride update. I always thought terrain, mount, speed, etc affected if your mount moved or not, but up until that post, and Morgenes' actions, it wasn't.

Rarsh brought up the idea it would be cool if shields could block arrows.

Let me recast these examples in a different light.

Morgenes implemented the ride code completely on the staff end, and I didn't see a thread regarding whether or not ride had modifiers. However, your post isn't about specifics, it merely uses them, so past here I will address it in that light. If we don't -know- how the ride code works, we can suggest improvements, even if we don't know whether or not those improvements have been implemented. Threads like this used to exist all over the place; go back to the code discussion backlog and you'll see them. In fact, your mistake in thinking that this code already existed was due to the OOC spread of IC info - it just happened to be misinformation in that case.

As for the idea that 'twould be cool if shields could block arrows, the thread spiralled down from there into the sharing of IC info. Here's how it could have gone instead.

Rarsh: Hey, I don't know if this can be done, but the ability to block arrows would be really cool.
7DV (used simply as a name that came to mind, as are all the names below): Yeah, you're right. But how would we implement that? Obviously, smaller shields should have a smaller chance to block, and break more easily
OHST: Hmm. I like this idea. I think shield material should affect chance and damage reduction too, since arrows are more likely to penetrate soft wood than chitin or bone.
Gimf: I disagree with you guys. I think shields should have a flat modifier according mostly to skill, because Zalanthans don't use shield tactics and we're talking about single arrows.

while Fathi, who knows in fact that shields can already block arrows, doesn't post.

[X-D]

A long time ago. the most common answer to a question was not Find out IC.

But something a bit longer.

That was, If you think it should, it probobly does, you will have to find out on your own.

If it doesn't, mail the staff on the matter or bug/idea it IG.

Now some things though have been bugged/idea's hundreds of times and still not fixed. Then you email staff several times and get no reply.

After all that, Meh, you have no real choice but to either ignore it or take it to the GDB. An amazing amount of stuff gets fixed or added from GDB discussions actually.

I could put in much more, but its more my opinion, because what might wow you does not..nor did it ever wow me. The first time I saw somebody parry an arrow with a a big ass shield the OOC reaction was, Meh, thats shit is broken.
And, it is, though if I say why it is here, everybody will scream IC info or revealing code!!!!

Problem is, there is no hard and fast rule on this stuff. Some people read the docs, some people read ALL of the docs then read them again. Some people only read enough to get by. There is no way for me to know who those people are, and I really don't think I should even be expected to care. I'm more on the side of, "if you don't want to possibly be exposed to minor IC /code issues, don't read the GDB." I didn't myself for many years.

[Gimfalisette]

I will tell a story that illustrates my hopes for all newbs to ARM, and indeed, for all of us who don't know everything already.

Once upon a time, I played a bard girl in Tuluk. She had made friends with a soldier of the Legions. They were kind of fond of each other. Well, the bard girl got a task from her patron, that she didn't know how to complete: She was supposed to go to Under Tuluk and do something. She had no idea where Under Tuluk was or how to get there, and -I- had no idea. So the bard girl's soldier friend showed her, because he did know.

Now, this may seem like a very simple, small secret. And indeed, the knowledge of where Under Tuluk is and how to get there seems rudimentary to -me- now.

But at the time, I OOCly felt like this: "Oh wow, a game secret! Oh this is so neat! I must be kind of special and important, if this other player is willing to share this with me! Wow wow wow! Finding out IC really works!"

Dalmeth could probably kill my future characters like 10 times, and I'd still have a warm place in my heart for him, for showing me my first game secret.

[brytta.leofa]

I agree when it comes to aspects of the world that don't have a direct real-world parallel...magick, psionics, specifics of geography (Under Tuluk I grant you, Gim), culture, and politics that are not generally known.  I disagree when it comes to the simulation of mundane skills.  Nobody should be particularly surprised to learn that shields can be used to stop arrows, whether he's seen Braveheart or not.

As a player, I generally do want to know whether the code takes things into account like you'd hope it does.  It's a simulated world, and some parts are always going to be illogical.  Not knowing what those parts are causes sadness and stupid death.

The grizzled sergeant says, beetling brows at you,
  "You gotta et them pills in the order I told you!"
You ask the grizzled sergeant,
  "But why? They both ends up in mah belly, ain't they?"
The grizzled sergeant says, cryptically,
  "Tain't coded like that, runner."

[Tisiphone]

A long time ago. the most common answer to a question was not Find out IC.

But something a bit longer.

That was, If you think it should, it probably does, you will have to find out on your own.

If it doesn't, mail the staff on the matter or bug/idea it IG.

This is a very good answer.

Now some things though have been bugged/idea's hundreds of times and still not fixed. Then you email staff several times and get no reply.

Probably because the staff, knowing more than you, disagree, think that the benefit/cost ratio is extremely unfavourable, or are currently overworked. Despite submitting numerous bug reports and emailing staff, I have never had a problem with code resolution.

After all that, meh, you have no real choice but to either ignore it or take it to the GDB.

This is specifically against the posting rules and official staff position.

An amazing amount of stuff gets fixed or added from GDB discussions actually.

I would want to see proof that not only do things get fixed after GDB discussions more often than without them, but also that the GDB discussions somehow contribute to that solution, to avoid making a propter hoc error.

[staggerlee]

I will tell a story that illustrates my hopes for all newbs to ARM, and indeed, for all of us who don't know everything already.

Once upon a time, I played a bard girl in Tuluk. She had made friends with a soldier of the Legions. They were kind of fond of each other. Well, the bard girl got a task from her patron, that she didn't know how to complete: She was supposed to go to Under Tuluk and do something. She had no idea where Under Tuluk was or how to get there, and -I- had no idea. So the bard girl's soldier friend showed her, because he did know.

Now, this may seem like a very simple, small secret. And indeed, the knowledge of where Under Tuluk is and how to get there seems rudimentary to -me- now.

But at the time, I OOCly felt like this: "Oh wow, a game secret! Oh this is so neat! I must be kind of special and important, if this other player is willing to share this with me! Wow wow wow! Finding out IC really works!"

Dalmeth could probably kill my future characters like 10 times, and I'd still have a warm place in my heart for him, for showing me my first game secret.

Meanwhile he got to interact with someone and explain something ic, thus making his character look more seasoned by comparison and giving you both interaction.  Rather than opening that map file, n n w e u e d d n complete task, turn in for reward

That's a really good example.  Tiny little things encouraging interaction and rp, and leaving at least one person totally happy and excited about it.

Could we please, both sides of this, exercise some restraint and not see this thread turn into flames? Just try to stay on topic.  Start another thread to argue the philosophy of ic/ooc boundaries.

[Lizzie]

I like everything I've read so far. To touch a little on what Fathi said though, there's also a matter of going too far with the whole "find out IC" issue. I've been told that twice that I'm aware of, only to discover what I was asking about was actually a snippet of buggy code and NOT an IC situation at all. I've also asked a few times about things I couldn't find in the help files, and was told to find out IC, and then I discovered after the fact, that I was trying to do a "search" for the wrong words. The help files were there, and very explicit, and very helpful. They just weren't intuitive so it took me awhile to find them.

So mostly what I'm saying is, to veterans - if someone asks you something, and you are about to tell them "find out IC," please make sure it really IS an IC thing, before saying that. Because if I find out a month later that I struggled for days about something, becoming frustrated, spending countless hours trying to do something IC, that turned out not to be an IC thing at all, it will certainly indicate which veterans to stop trusting for help, and who to stop recommending that new players go to.

[Tisiphone]

I agree when it comes to aspects of the world that don't have a direct real-world parallel...magick, psionics, specifics of geography (Under Tuluk I grant you, Gim), culture, and politics that are not generally known.  I disagree when it comes to the simulation of mundane skills.  Nobody should be particularly surprised to learn that shields can be used to stop arrows, whether he's seen Braveheart or not.

As a player, I generally do want to know whether the code takes things into account like you'd hope it does.  It's a simulated world, and some parts are always going to be illogical.  Not knowing what those parts are causes sadness and stupid death.

The grizzled sergeant says, beetling brows at you,
  "You gotta et them pills in the order I told you!"
You ask the grizzled sergeant,
  "But why? They both ends up in mah belly, ain't they?"
The grizzled sergeant says, cryptically,
  "Tain't coded like that, runner."

This is a tempting stance to take, but I must respectfully disagree for reasons I believe I've stated above, but will attempt to tailour into a response here. Firstly, most of the things that we assume work like real life generally do. Secondly, those parts that don't may not be broken. Here are at least three possibilities that come to mind to the contrary:

- there may be playability issues. For example, you can't easily one-shot someone in combat even as a mul (note: I don't know that this is true, so don't take it as truth!) because ending characters that brutally and easily isn't favourable to a game atmosphere.

- you may not have as good an understanding of how real-life works as the person who attempted to code how something works. Lots of things I see posted are going off of 'common sense' viz. a vague understanding of pop culture physics and sociology.

- you may not be taking all of the game-world's variables into account. Take especial note of the virtual ones, and give people the benefit of the doubt.

Finally, and importantly to what I think the heart of this thread is, oftentimes even the well-intentioned spread of IC info does more harm to the game than good.

[X-D]

Now some things though have been bugged/idea's hundreds of times and still not fixed. Then you email staff several times and get no reply.


Probably because the staff, knowing more than you, disagree, think that the benefit/cost ratio is extremely unfavourable, or are currently overworked. Despite submitting numerous bug reports and emailing staff, I have never had a problem with code resolution

There, I bolded the key point there, which makes your response null.

An amazing amount of stuff gets fixed or added from GDB discussions actually.


I would want to see proof that not only do things get fixed after GDB discussions more often than without them, but also that the GDB discussions somehow contribute to that solution, to avoid making a propter hoc error.

To this point, I'm not going to go back and search through 3 GDB and 15 years worth of archives, Sorry.

But to name a few. Being able to eat a tablet even when you are full
Having weight changed to  be able to go lower then 1 stone.
Watch command.
Feel
mood
ride tweaks
poison tweaks
more skills using stam
hemote
semote
command emotes
and there are MANY more.

True, this could all have come about by bugging or emails. But oddly, in EVERY case it did not happen untill AFTER being talked about on GDB. Coincidence? I think not.

[Gimfalisette]

Some people will probably not have seen this before, so I thought I'd re-post it. Behold the story of what can happen to the game when IC information is spread OOCly.

From the old old archives at http://www.armageddon.org/HyperNews/get/general-archive1996/7.html :

Many times, I've heard players say they'd like to be able to see behind the scenes of Armageddon. That they'd like to be able to find out what the whole story is.

This will be a chance to see one small part of the world, that you probably haven't seen before. I'm going to tell you about a quest, some of the motivations behind it, and the actions that transpired. Why am I going to do this?

Because some people were talking on isca, and spread some OOC info. I could continue the quest even with people knowing what they've heard there, but it just won't be that much fun for anyone involved, myself included. Those players spreading OOC info effectively killed the quest.

I hope that you take the time to read this, and that the next time that you are in a situation where you might feel like telling someone something that happened In Character, that you will think about how you may be ruining someone else's fun.

There was a dwarf, a defiler, named Freil. He used his magick to put people to sleep and rob them, while he slowly grew in power. For over 5 months his attacks in Tuluk and Allanak had people hunting for the sorcerer, although none knew what he looked like. Freil had his own motivations for his actions, most of which was to extend his life, as the old dwarf was nearing the end of his days. I would give you his whole life history, but this post will be too lengthy already.

Finally, Freil got overly greedy, and set upon a group of 4 Jkarr who were outside of the city. One was able to see the invisible dwarf, and Freil fled, angry that after several years of robberies, his description was now going to get out. He tried to talk the Jkarr into saying that he'd killed Freil, in exchange for money and help, but the Jkarr refused. At this point, probably 15 or more players were involved in the quest, either hunting Freil, or having been targets of his.

It is at this point, that the first player who engaged in the OOC talk that ultimitely ruined the quest, became involved. PC1 walked widely through the streets of Tuluk, asking people if they wished to go "hunting defilers", and one of Freil's spies heard him, and reported it to the dwarf. PC1 was ambushed on the road, and his backpack stolen while he slept a magickal sleep. Several more encounters between the two took place, Freil managing to stay a step ahead of PC1. Freil again, tried to bribe PC1 into telling others Freil was dead, but PC1 refused, and boasted of killing other sorcerers, and what he'd do to Freil. At this point, Freil grew so angry at PC1, that he dedicated his focus to ruining PC1's life.

Freil, in searching to extend his life, developed a new magick. He gained the ability to create an image of PC1, though the cost was great. It would only last for a short time, but Freil was able to control the fake-PC1 while his body lay dormant, for periods up to an hour or two.

Several times, the fake PC1 went forth, insulting friends, and causing trouble. Freil's goal was to eventually make things so bad for PC1, that his own friends would kill him.

Freil also never gave PC1 rest, and several times tried to drag PC1 away from his friends, put him to sleep, then defile the land until he could create the fake-PC1, and send him back in.

It was soon after this, that PC1 and PC2, out hunting for Freil, were attacked by undead from an entirely different source. PC2 sent out a message to a third person (PC3), telling him that they were probably going to die, and to pass on some final words to a loved one of his if they didn't make it out.

They made it out, although PC 3 was not around at the time to know it. PC1 and PC2 went on to have several very high-profile adventures over the next few real life days. PC1 and PC2 though, went out exploring some more, and managed to get themselves killed. No one knew where they had gone, or that they were dead.

I, as an immortal, knew they had died. However, Freil had no way of knowing, and so he continued using the fake-PC1 to set the character up. I was very gratified to see the puzzled reactions of some of PC1's friends as he told them he'd struck an agreement with the defiler, but that they couldn't talk about it until he said it was safe (so that they wouldn't mention it again to the real PC1).

I planned to continue like this, and saw many possibilities for if Freil and the fake-PC. I guesstimate that over 20 characters had been involved in the quest to this point, and if I played the fake-PC well, I could probably involve a lot of players in the game.

Until... I log in, and hear people talking about how both of these characters are dead. PC3, who had been told the two were dying, had heard OOC that they'd died. Because of this, he never bothered to ask around to see if they were still alive. He instead just started telling people they were dead. If the players of the 2 dead PC's had not spread the word on ISCA they had died, PC3, who heard of the other adventures these 2 had had after their close call, would have inquired as to the timing, and found out they had been seen for IC weeks after he'd received the contact. Indeed, soon after their death, the fake-PC1 showed up and was seen by at least 10 players.

Well, now that everyone knows they are really dead, it really does make it hard me to run the quest. Those people who were directly interacting with the fake-PC1, would have had a lot of fun, I think, as they gradually figured out their friend wasn't what they thought he was. But now they know he is really dead, even OOCly, they were robbed of the chance to figure it all out on their own by the OOC actions of all 3 players.

That is why I'm posting this. That is why I'm taking the time to tell you the whole story. When you talk OOC, you are screwing over your fellow players. Even seemingly insignificant things like this, hurt the game, and ruin other people's fun.

The next time you find yourself in a situation where you want to tell a friend something that happened on the mud, please remember this story. We all love Armageddon, and it is natural to want to talk about it. But maybe you can reminesce about a character who is long dead instead, and save that new tale for somewhere down the road.

- Thanas

[staggerlee]

Just for good measure and because I think it rather concisely describes what several people have tried to say:

2. Do NOT post information that is IC-sensitive. While debates over definitions of this term have raged in the past on the discussion boards, one fact has emerged: some people really prefer to experience things in the game, rather than inadvertently have the experience spoiled for them from reading this board. Therefore, when asking yourself whether or not what you're posting is too IC-sensitive, err on the side of caution.

http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,28823.0.html

[Seeker]

That story is worth remembering.  It would have been an -awesome- plot, and everyone missed out on it.

To the point of discussing code, I think we all agree (with X-D) that discussing how we think the code should work is absolutely fine.  Many improvements have been made from suggestions like this.  The problem comes in when players begin to describe how the current codes does work. Or to explain the deficiencies in the current code in defense of their suggestions.

Take the example of riding.  Instead of anyone giving up any details about how the current code is reflected IG (which is against GDB forum policy), focusing on how it might work better got great results for everyone.  There really are dozens of examples like that.

Sometimes, I imagine, the staff just sits back chuckling, knowing that the current code it operating even better than what was suggested on the GDB.  Other times, the underlying code has been improved by staff with suggestions and the game just got better for everyone and no secrets or misinformation were revealed.

Suggestions of how code should work = good.
Explanations of any kind of how the current code does work = bad.


Seeker

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Suggestions of how code should work = good.
Explanations of any kind of how the current code does work = bad.

See, this is really my pet peeve about people saying find out OOC.

I absolutely agree concerning plot related stuff. That stuff should be kept IG. But code? It is really no different than buying a D&D manual and learning how to play D&D. If you think about it, actually, we are playing D&D. The code has no effect on how awesome your D&D experience is. That falls in the realm of Dungeon Master storytelling.

Why should a newbie not know that one day he will block water ballons? Or that one day, he can take the feat, block water ballons? Such a stance is actually putting an emphasis on code, something that the same players decry so often.

For the sake of those people, I will watch my responses, but I really think that minor shit about the code should not rip such a angered response from people that are more concerned about the story anyway. I mean, no matter how many little things the staff tucks into the code, it really is just a couple of dice in the end, anyway.

[Seeker]

I don't believe reading the GDB should be the way to learn the mechanics, strengths, tricks and shortcomings of the code. The staff policy seems clear that it is not.

The help files, e-mailing the Mud Account, the use of Helpers and IC experiences (even including the proper use, if necessary, of the OOC command) are all wonderfully designed to handle that.  I am not suggesting hiding syntax or short-changing anyone's understanding of how to move and interact in the world.  I am just suggesting that the GDB is not the place to exchange such information or to pull aside the curtain and reveal the machinery's construction.


Seeker

[Apocalyptic_Cow]

Now some things though have been bugged/idea's hundreds of times and still not fixed. Then you email staff several times and get no reply.

After all that, Meh, you have no real choice but to either ignore it or take it to the GDB. An amazing amount of stuff gets fixed or added from GDB discussions actually.

To me, this sounds like you are demanding that a specific area of a game of your personal concern gets immediate attention, otherwise you are going to stomp on the fun of other players to get what you want. To me, this sounds like a very unfair expectation, and frankly, it isn't a very respectful way to treat other players. Staff are busy, I'm sure they get tons of emails regarding things like clan updates and plots they are running regularly that have prioritized attention. Sometimes your emails likely get overlooked -- but come on, do what you would like to have done to you if you were in their shoes: send a polite reminder later. If you don't get a response, send again after a fair amount of time. Then again. If you are cool about it, I'm sure they will eventually notice or remember the issue you are trying to raise, and it will get taken care of just the same.

Sometimes I don't think people realize that staff are volunteers, meaning they are unpaid, which means this is not their job and they have a limited amount of time to deal with certain issues every so often. Add to that that only certain staff can fix certain issues like code. Now, if say, Morgenes, is feeling particularly inspired one day to hop on and hammer out a section of Arm Reborn code that he just had a good idea about, I don't want your 'taking things to the GDB' to throw him off at that instant because you demand your issue gets attention before what he considers its priority to really be in the greater scheme of the game. I don't want a clan's RPT to be less vivid because, at that moment, something else needed to get attention because someone was talking about it loudly on the GDB.

I just think that revealing IC info on the GDB is a lousy way of motivating staff to get things done, or motivating them in general. We're a community of eccentric people who like to play an on-line text-based roleplaying game. There is a lot more in common between us all than I think most of us assume. I think a lot of the IC info stuff comes down to just being cool with people, respect that people may -not- want to know things. Nobody is saying that you and your best friend can't talk about the game, but in a room full of crowded people, just try not to shout out things that might bother others.