Why 'gickers are players' preferred guilds

[some guy]

I'd love it if I, as a player, would feel something similar to what the documentation states that my character should feel upon encountering a magicker outside of such safe environments as taverns and bazaars. It would be awesome if I could be frightened, surprised and mystified when my character sees one of these destroyers-of-worlds. After dozens upon dozens of such encounters, especially around the time some six months ago when they literally happened on a daily basis, I now just feel a bland, jarred annoyance except for the occasional exception where the magicker is very well-played and can create an atmosphere. Things seem to have improved somewhat since that dreadful period where in the end the playerbase practically rebelled, but it's still quite far from how I feel it should be.

[jhunter]

I don't understand where people are still complaining about too many magickers. I've still not experienced that problem myself. 99% of the non-magicker pcs I've played since I started playing Arm' back in '95 have gone their entire lives without experiencing magick in any form. Even if I had experienced it more, I'd still fear for my pc if they encountered a magicker outside Allanak.


Personally, I would prefer that the documentation were altered to specify that views on magick aren't the same everywhere and that player numbers may not reflect the exact ratios that virtual and coded npcs do. I sincerely wish that people would get the idea out of their head that pc numbers are supposed to be some sort of an exact reflection of the general statistics listed in the docs. Or remove that part of the docs entirely.

[Armaddict]

Jhunter:

First off...don't worry, dude, I recognized you as an old player

Main point:  I'm actually not attacking the population of magickers so much as the repetition through which some people choose to play them.  Even that is a minor point.  Every few years, there were brief spurts of activity on the GDB complaining about the social ramifications of being a mage.  Limited employment options, lack of PC interaction and so on and so forth.  What was not understood was that, as Seph pointed out...that -was- the role.  It had an entirely different dynamic that some players simply couldn't cope with, but that would not end involvement in the game.  It simply made the mage the specialized role, not one to be played by the player who was drawn to the game because in D&D, they always played a mage.

I realize the magick system of Armageddon is...-amazing-.  But it needs to be remembered that even if that is the sole-reason for being here, the role shouldn't be changed to allow those players who only want to play mages to feel involved.  Leader PC's need to keep the social things in line.  Templars and nobles need to maintain the social order as well as play their character, not make everything an exception to involve as many people as possible and so on and so forth.

Again, from Myrdryn's post here:

The feel and environment of the game is in large dependent upon the players at large.  A desert world where resources are scare.  Where certain aspects of the game world just are, and the main thing reinforcing these things are the players and the way they react.  Certain things can be coded, other things (like fear/acceptance of magik) can't be.  Hate for elves, or a dwarf's focus can't be regulated by the code.  If someone chose to roleplay their half-giant as stupid or smart is up to the player and can't be regulated by the game.

This is what I was getting at with earlier posts.  There are coded advantages for these classes, and that is not my complaint.  That is how it is intended and how it is SUPPOSED to be.  What worries me is that their drawbacks are far more dependent on the playerbase to act consistently with documentation and the flavor of the game.  In other words, insuring that "Zalanthas" remains "Zalanthas" while people play "Armageddon".  (Sorry Moe, had to poke that again )

(Edited to add:  Essentially...when things are played well, the status quo fluxes but generally returns back within a relatively short period of time.  What I've been observing is a constant sway in one direction that results in less and less remembrance and observation to the 'norm', because the -perception- of the 'norm' is changing, while the norm itself is not.  Go back to the norm, and the population will go back to the fluxes that were far more familiar without disrupting the depth of the world created as it was.  Interestingly enough...if this is a stupid line of thought that is just clung to by some of the old players, this problem could easily be fixed by simply changing documentation with notes of how the culture is evolving.  But if that's not what's intended...it really shouldn't even seem like that would happen unless the exception is being played far enough to change the perception...and back to the beginning with that whole deal.)

[LoD]

Currently we are just schizophrenic about the issue, and our insanity causes us to point the finger of blame at other players. We have the constant dissonance of attempting to play by the docs (and wanting others to play by the docs, so we can retain immersion), while we're trying to do this inside a system that doesn't produce the result the docs say we should see.

This is exactly the problem that many people don't think exists.

The documentation says one thing, while the system actually encourages another.  And subsequent discussions around this topic always have people in a tizzy because they believe that change will always result in the most negative outcome possible.  Group A doesn't want their ability to play magickers removed, while Group B don't want their ability to play within the game world as documented to be so greatly diminished by the immense footprint of magickal game play.  Each group strives for something that, unfortunately, limits the fun of the other.

And, yet, both seem to point at the documentation to support their side of the argument.

Players that seem to prefer a low magick world point toward the rare and mysterious nature of magick as described by the documentation, even though the system has been slowly designed to accomplish the opposite.

Players that seem to prefer a high magick world point toward the fearful and superstitious nature to which mundanes should be expected to be held, even though the system has been slowly designed to accomplish the opposite.

Looking at the reasons why people choose the magicker class can help to isolate features of the class and magicker role that are the most attractive, perhaps so that those features could be retained when considering future systems or compromises.  Just remember that people (who have an issue) generally aren't angry at any magicker players, or even the magick system in general, but at the situation.  And that doesn't make this an anti-magick or anti-magicker thread.

As to the notion that the PC's are comprised of "special people", this has always felt like a rationalization to go against the spirit of the game rather than occasionally drawing outside of the suggested guidelines.  Yes, if we were to base our characters on a roll the dice against the actual population demographics, there would hardly be anyone but slaves and poverty level common folk populating the game.  However, the idea that the documentation is aimed at Zalanthas while we players are actually playing a sub-game called Armageddon that completely ignores said documentation on a whim results in exactly the type of game some of us don't want to play.

I want Zalanthas.  You can keep Armageddon by that definition.

I don't understand where people are still complaining about too many magickers. I've still not experienced that problem myself. 99% of the non-magicker pcs I've played since I started playing Arm' back in '95 have gone their entire lives without experiencing magick in any form. Even if I had experienced it more, I'd still fear for my pc if they encountered a magicker outside Allanak.

Conversely, I've witnessed consistent magickal characters in and outside of cities on a regular basis with nearly every single character I've played in the last 5 years, whether it be in the north or south.  Experiences vary.

-LoD

[some guy]

There's a great line in the elf docs:
Desert Elf Misconceptions wrote:

Play a desert elf if you want to explore the world: No. This is wrong. This is like playing a mul, because you want to have a badass warrior; sure, the race enables you to do that, but you're missing the whole point of it.

Similarly, I'd say that if you playing a magicker to A) run rough-shod over mundane characters or B) because you think you'll be able to get involved with more plots as a magicker or C) because you're bored of mundanes, then you're similarly missing the whole point of it. These reasons might get you to play one or two magickers, but the 'serial magicker players', the 'problem players' (like me), probably play magickers for some other reason. For reasons that rooted in personal preference.

While this is partly true, there's an important difference in the fact that desert-elves are normally not allowed to go exploring the world willy nilly. If they leave the area they're more or less confined to without a very valid reason, there's likely to be both IC and OOC repercussions, and I think that most of the players who have played desert-elves for any length of time has at some point been contacted by a staff member asking why they were somewhere they didn't belong. Magickers, however, aren't bound by such rules. In fact, they aren't bound by any rules other than what IC restrictions may be imposed on them in a few places around the world. If they do play a magicker to, as you put it, run rough-shod over mundanes, as has been the case with an unsettlingly large number of magickers, they will at most leave an trail of OOCly angry players behind.

On this mud you're not even really required to roleplay encounters since you can spam-walk after someone, kill them immediately upon entering the room, and claim that you were roleplaying since your actions reflected your character's intentions. We have no rules of engagement, no punishment for the players who make no effort to make such encounters interesting even for the victims, so a number of players don't try. Magickers aren't the only ones guilty of this, but it's infinitely more prominent when they do it since they tend to have the ability to utterly obliterate any mundane without much chance of them escaping. At least a raider normally has to defeat you in combat, giving you a chance to both escape and to possibly overpower them.

I have no beef whatsoever with the portion of the magickers who add to the game and make it more fun. I think that should be a requirment for someone playing this kind of character. The ones who create storylines, the ones who run plots and have a great influence on the game world - you know, the ones we remember and fear, even if we've only heard their names. They belong in the game and they have a very important part to play, fulfilling the documentation and so on. Unfortunately they're about one out of every ten magickers, the rest being either twinks who hurt the game, complete non-factors who sit in a cave somewhere out of anyone's reach, or are utterly uninteresting, interchangable gemmed mages whose names we never even learn. They tend to do none of the above while contributing greatly to the negative aspects of what magickers are, leaving a game that is crowded with supposedly rare menaces and affecting the game in other unfortunate ways. I believe that the laughable ease of becoming powerful as a magicker contributes greatly to this factor, because it attracts the kind of player who wants great coded power but has no particular interest in doing something with it other than furthering their own desires. If magick was truly difficult and time-consuming to master, I think we'd see a larger ratio of the positive type of magicker, the ones who are willing to and capable of fulfilling their purpose in the game world. These proverbial White Rantarris and their gemmed counterparts who aren't forgotten a week after they disappear.

I don't see it as a one or the other kind of deal. Magick could be balanced so that it doesn't take eight months to reach power or two weeks to fully branch. I fully believe that a compromise could be found so that those who want to play productive magickers aren't deterred by an almost certain death before they reach their goals while the weaker souls aren't tempted by the promise of immeasurable power before they've even spent their starting coin. Assassins aren't worth much until quite a long way down the road, leaving truly accomplished and notorious assassins about as rare as they should be. It seems to me that the "magicker players", for lack of better, have become too comfortable with this unreasonably easy journey to power that they're not even willing to consider a system that isn't so effortless. It's a shame, especially since it's plain to see how devastating the negative effects have become.

[some guy]

I don't understand where people are still complaining about too many magickers. I've still not experienced that problem myself. 99% of the non-magicker pcs I've played since I started playing Arm' back in '95 have gone their entire lives without experiencing magick in any form. Even if I had experienced it more, I'd still fear for my pc if they encountered a magicker outside Allanak.

Yes, jhunter, but you've always been the inexplicable exception who never sees any of the things that are so blatantly wrong with the game that everyone else has conceded to it. I've come to believe that you're either blind or just extremely stubborn.

[jhunter]

Conversely, I've witnessed consistent magickal characters in and outside of cities on a regular basis with nearly every single character I've played in the last 5 years, whether it be in the north or south.  Experiences vary.

-LoD

Which is fine. I just hope that you are not expecting that, living in Allanak, your pc isn't going to ever see magickers. I think every Allanaki would likely have seen several gemmed mages throughout their lives. They might not have witnessed magick but I believe they most definitely -all- would've seen gemmed mages.

[jhunter]

I don't understand where people are still complaining about too many magickers. I've still not experienced that problem myself. 99% of the non-magicker pcs I've played since I started playing Arm' back in '95 have gone their entire lives without experiencing magick in any form. Even if I had experienced it more, I'd still fear for my pc if they encountered a magicker outside Allanak.

Yes, jhunter, but you've always been the inexplicable exception who never sees any of the things that are so blatantly wrong with the game that everyone else has conceded to it. I've come to believe that you're either blind or just extremely stubborn.

Please refrain from flaming me for expressing my experiences with the game. My currently pc lives in Allanak and has only seen one gemmer in the last few RL months. That sounds like much less than I would expect to see.

Oh yes, and a few people on the GDB do not make up -everyone else-. The people that actually post on the GDB are only a percentage of the playerbase, there are plenty of people that don't bother with the GDB and just play the game. Mostly because of people getting snarky with those that don't agree with them.

[Kill4Free]

I wouldnt say that magickers are players preferred guilds.  Granted I dont have enough karma to make a magicker, but even if I did, I would never really play a character.  I might run one or two, just so I can get a feel of the spells, and know their limits, but even without that it sorta gives them an aura that my characters dread, as anything can happen, at least thats what they think.  Magickers for me would be the most boring class, eventually, even if they get really good, and expert at combat magick, what is the fun in playing when you can just oneshot anyone with spam spells, or paralyse them and kill them with a single blow to the head.  Granted they can do other things, but it isnt truly fun, there is little risk, and one doesnt value something that is easy to obtain, as much as something that is hard.  I do realise that assassins can also kill someone in one hit, but to get to that level, they must survive for -a long time- and do everything perfectly, and even then there is a chance it might not work.

To me magickers are just the easy route, and I prefer earning something worthwhile.

[Armaddict]

The people that actually post on the GDB are only a percentage of the playerbase, there are plenty of people that don't bother with the GDB and just play the game. Mostly because of people getting snarky with those that don't agree with them.

Not to derail, but this is indeed true.

[Marauder Moe]

Hey LoD, didn't you used to say that back in the old days before karma, when magickers would hang out in the middle of Tuluk and practice spells, things weren't so bad and magick was still kinda scary?   

Anyway, I certainly don't mean to say that "PCs are special" means we can completely ignore the documentation.  I just mean we should accept that we can't match it completely, or at least that the game would be pretty boring if we did.  We don't ignore the documented world of Zalanthas, we simply augment it and emphasize the more interesting aspects (which for many people is magick, apparently).


Also, as Gimf pointed out, this really isn't an argument about the playerbase reflecting the game world.  People are perfectly fine to play a game where humans and wealthy commoners are disproportionately represented.  However, for some reason, the prevalence of supernatural guilds irks people.  It might be more productive to try and get to the root of that feeling rather than go around in circles about the disparity between the game and the world/documentation.

[Jenred]

To side with Jhunter a moment... I've not always played in the off-peak time period, but I can say that since playing in this period... which is usually anywhere from 1am-7am PST, I can say that I have not seen a magicker on in this time period in almost a year. If I had been playing consistently in this time-zone for my whole Armageddon career, instead of just recently, it would set in my head a rarity of magick-players. However since I have played on peak-times I know this to be gravely false.

But I could easily see a group, albeit it small, of players with little to no magick exposure just because of play-times.

And this group could easily be saying: I don't understand what the big deal is, I've seen maybe 1 or 2 magickers in my entire time playing.

Where the group that deals with the 60-70 player peak time may experience 6-7 magickers, and that is still only representing 10% of the pbase. Which is generally fairly low.

[Zoan]

I've seen plenty of magickers, albeit gemmers but I've seen more who weren't. Even attacks by magickers have been rare, and of everyone in Allanak I'd know this kind of thing due to my role and my daily login rate. There really is no problem at all, at least southside.

As for the gemmers, they do their roles admirably, and have never seemed to break my low-fantasy immersion with their presence or magicks.

[Dakurus]

Not hard to see why there are so many different view points and why it's such a difficult issue to get anywhere with.
For those that have experienced some of them, just look at the culture and documentation, regarding acceptance, belief, and treatment of magickers throughout the locales of Zalanthas. It's a tremendous hodge podge running the full gamut of possibilities. Take these cultures and the regions in which they live, add to that the extent of the lands to which their sphere of influence is (or in which their people may be seen), and you have immediate and severe conflcts. The fact that these conflicts have not been resolved over the timeline of Zalanthas is unrealistic, and so players end up stepping outside the culture/docs to be able to play.

As large as the known world is, it's a small sandbox when you consider how many civilizations/cultures there are in it, and players don't much like being restricted to their section of the sandbox. To expect the culture and belief your current character is supposed to have is prevalent one small step outside your sandbox, let alone 15 rooms away, usually ends up being not true. This is a hard thing to swallow, let alone roleplay in because 15 rooms doesn't take very long to travel through.

Hard to have a consistent, easily playable world, when in one room it's okay to run with krathi man, in the next vivadu man is your spiritual advisor, in the next sorcereror is your tree hugger protector, in the next we kill all magickers, in the next they have their uses but they are disdained.

[jhunter]

However, for some reason, the prevalence existance of supernatural guilds irks people.  It might be more productive to try and get to the root of that feeling rather than go around in circles about the disparity between the game and the world/documentation.

This would make it more true to my opinion of it.

[Gimfalisette]

However, for some reason, the prevalence existance of supernatural guilds irks people.  It might be more productive to try and get to the root of that feeling rather than go around in circles about the disparity between the game and the world/documentation.

This would make it more true to my opinion of it.

You attempt to make this argument in pretty much every thread where magickers are discussed, but that doesn't make it more correct. There are plenty of us who are fine with the concept of non-mundanes and magick, with the fact that they are in game, and with the fact that our mundane characters may encounter this stuff. That, however, does not mean that there's not some point where it's just too much. Quick and dirty analogy: I love chocolate, I eat chocolate, I respect your right to enjoy chocolate as you like, but if I eat too much of it my system freaks out. My abstention from chocolate or restriction of it in my diet does not mean I wish it would go entirely away.

[Gimfalisette]

Also, why is it that when we talk about mundanes and non-mundanes, people always seem to come armed with the idea that this interplay is a zero-sum game? Why do we seem so set on that belief? People immediately begin cries of "don't nerf me, man" and "you just don't like magickers!"

But a -system- is not necessarily a zero-sum game. There's nothing that says one group of players must gain an advantage and another group lose some advantage, when it comes to the overall system. (Unless, of course, the system in question really IS a zero-sum game.) I happen to believe that ARM is a "sum" game, and that what's good for the overall playerbase is really the thing to shoot for.

[Desertman]

Someone, I think it was Jhunter posted that they have been in Allanak for a few RL months and have only seen one magicker...

I wish I played how you play...

I have been in Allanak twice, for one IC night each time, in the past RL month...Now thats only two IC nights...and I have seen seven non-mundanes.

Four were gemmers, and three I knew were non-mundanes from finding out with past characters that they are non-mundanes.

You can argue, "Well if your current pc doesnt know they are magickers/psi's, then technically its not the same."....

From an IC standpoint, you are correct, technically I have only seen four gemmed mages.

From an OOC standpoint, I have spent about 30 minutes in Allanak in the past RL month, and seen seven non-mundanes roaming about.

And I was only visiting the local tavern for a quick ale. *shrugs*

[Malken]

That's why I don't believe anything that jhunter says anymore when it comes to magickers..

99% of the non-magicker pcs I've played since I started playing Arm' back in '95 have gone their entire lives without experiencing magick in any form.

And only seen one gemmer in Allanak for a few RL months?

Give me a break.. I'm really believing that most magickers discussion NEVER get anywhere because of jhunter himself, coming up with facts like these.

I know I'll be called a troll for saying something like that or trying to start a flame, but I'm really not, I really believe this to be a fact.

[Jenred]

This may be a different reason then most people, but the reason I play magickers predominantly now, more then before, is because for the most part I play in Allanak, and ever since the removal of the old desert-code, back when fire-ants, jozhal, tarantulas, and so forth roamed in what I viewed as a realistic manner, the desert has been relatively devoid of creatures. I have forayed into the desert numerous times, with numerous characters and can sometimes go a real-life week without seeing a scrab.

The only thing hostile about the desert nowadays is the weather.

So magickers offer something else to do in Allanak, besides being a non-combat experiencing guard, aide, or crafter. At least magick is entertaining... and provides a level of intrigue when dealing with other players.

[jhunter]

That's why I don't believe anything that jhunter says anymore when it comes to magickers..

99% of the non-magicker pcs I've played since I started playing Arm' back in '95 have gone their entire lives without experiencing magick in any form.

And only seen one gemmer in Allanak for a few RL months?

Give me a break.. I'm really believing that most magickers discussion NEVER get anywhere because of jhunter himself, coming up with facts like these.

I know I'll be called a troll for saying something like that or trying to start a flame, but I'm really not, I really believe this to be a fact.

Believe what you want. I don't care. It doesn't change my experience with the game any. Just because my experience with the game differs from yours doesn't make mine any less real. What possible motive would I have for lying about it? I do not appreciate being called a liar for no apparent reason than to be a jerk to me on the board.
It -is- completely true that about 1 out of every 10 pcs I've had has experienced magick. I do -not- count -seeing- a gemmer in Allanak as "experiencing" magick.

[Malken]

Believe what you want. I don't care. It doesn't change my experience with the game any. Just because my experience with the game differs from yours doesn't make mine any less real. What possible motive would I have for lying about it? I do not appreciate being called a liar for no apparent reason than to be a jerk to me on the board.
It -is- completely true that about 1 out of every 10 pcs I've had has experienced magick. I do -not- count -seeing- a gemmer in Allanak as "experiencing" magick.

Please refrain from flaming me for expressing my experiences with the game. My currently pc lives in Allanak and has only seen one gemmer in the last few RL months.

You wrote only two hours ago that your current pc lives in Allanak and has only seen one gemmer in the last few RL months, then you write that "seeing" a gemmer in Allanak doesn't count as experiencing magick.. Either way, it just shows to me that your examples are always in the extreme
and that you seem to be 0.1% of the playerbase, yet you are also the most vocal one opposed to changes in the magick system and I think this is the reason why we haven't had any changes in so long.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but your numbers never seem to make sense to me.. I hope someone can explain better for me if you think I'm being a jerk.

[jhunter]

My point between the two posts is that I've only even seen one magicker in two RL months living in a place that magickers are allowed to live in. I haven't at all "experienced" magick with the pc. Meaning, that I haven't seen a spell cast, a spell effect or anything that would appear that magick has been used toward my own pc or  another pc in my presence.

[Is Friday]

Red Storm doesn't count!

[Gimfalisette]

I also would not consider it "experiencing" magick if my PC had merely seen a gemmer. Experiencing, to me, means that my PC is directly affected by some magickal or non-mundane effect. By my definition, I have only had 1 PC in my 2+years of play who never experienced anything non-mundane. The rest of my PCs have been the chosen target of non-mundane stuff quite frequently, both in Allanak and Tuluk.

However, anecdotal evidence of this sort is pointless to talk about, since there's no way to extrapolate it to the rest of the MUD. We just do not have the necessary data to conclude anything about quantities of non-mundanes or their overall effects on the playerbase.