Design Philosophy - Roleplay Intensive?

[staggerlee]

First I'd like to make it clear that my interest in this is analytical, and that it shouldn't be seen as an attack on the game.  I'm interested in philosophy and structure here.

The Problem:

After a few comments made regarding what the code should and should not allow, and the state of clans, I've been thinking about the design philosophy behind Arm, and come to the conclusion that it does not reward roleplay.

Staff on this MUD seem to take a very hands off approach, I've heard it asserted that if the code allows something it should be doable, and I know they prefer not to give stat bumps or to interfere in the workings of the game.  Again and again we're told to solve things IC.

Now, with the limited tools of a player what does resolving things IC mean?
-Use your coded abilities to resolve the situation.
-Network and use the coded abilities of others to resolve a situation.

Example:  GMH is having a hard time attracting skilled crafters, therefore the threat of NPC/PC violence is placed on their competition.

Now. I'm not advocating a MUSH.  I like the idea of code to resolve conflict, but my issue is the lack of reward for rp.  The game rewards social networking, arguably the most powerful characters use the coded abilities of others to get things done, and it rewards manipulation of information and knowledge.  But so does any mmorpg.  There is no arguing that knowledge and networking are power.

Where is RP rewarded? The only situation I can think of in which rp can be rewarded is within a clan, and in that case the benefits are fairly small compared to the restrictions placed on characters.   I've always liked underling roles in clans, because to some extent they reward rp. You can rise in the ranks by keeping your uniform polished, showing proper etiquette, cleaning latrines, and other things that are entirely rped. 


The Future:

As the game moves toward increasinly player run structures in Arm2.0 I see the opportunity for rp characters becoming increasingly slim. For entirely player run organizations and independants, rewards have to come purely from code - there's no room for your leader to hire roles that aren't supported by code unless the organization/indvidual is making a massive surplus income.

On the surface the game demands roleplay. It's insisted that we do it, that we stay ic, and so forth.  But while the game demands roleplaying, roleplaying is not what the game rewards. The game rewards through the code and through networking.  Therefore the behavior it encourages is not the behavior that it claims to desire.

Currently it seems that roleplay is a thin facade over social networking and code use.  The design philosophy for Arm puts rp at the most in a secondary role, only after those others.  Whether or not that is intentional or desired is another question, but I for one would be interested in a system - or at least ot hear ideas for a system - in which rp is actually rewarded and encouraged.  How can it be done?

[jstorrie]

I think you're way out in left field here, staggerlee. And I strongly disagree that 'resolve it IC' always comes down to 'use your coded power.'

[staggerlee]

I think you're way out in left field here, staggerlee. And I strongly disagree that 'resolve it IC' always comes down to 'use your coded power.'

Elaborate?

[musashi]

To touch on some things you said a little bit, staff are yes, very reluctant to give skill or stat boosts, but I think in those cases it's just more to be fair than to be siding with the code. If you set one guy with better stats than he rolled but don't do it for the next, it probably creates an image the staff just want to get away from.

But when it comes to ... animating an NPC even if you didn't wish up for it ... running plots across the game world ... room echos ... when it comes to these in game, role-play related things, staff has a much more hands on approach.

It was said in another thread but someone mentioned knowing a long lived warrior PC who was granted control over magick. That isn't something a player could ever do for another player, only staff could and they had to bend some coded rules to do it, so it isn't like they never allow the code to be circumvented, they just want to make it more the exception, less the rule.

[Marauder Moe]

There is a very strong correlation between players who roleplay well and players who network well.  That's one way how roleplay is rewarded.

I think there's also a negative correlation between players who roleplay well and players who get executed/assassinated often.  If you're interesting to play with, I think people tend to stretch further to come up with reasons to keep your character around.

[mansa]

Could you elaborate on a potential solution?
If the idea that "everything should be handled by code", do you think we need more coded solutions, and what could they be?
Do you think that the world needs to be more dynamic, and NPCs need to interact with characters more differently than what is current?

[staggerlee]

Could you elaborate on a potential solution?
If the idea that "everything should be handled by code", do you think we need more coded solutions, and what could they be?
Do you think that the world needs to be more dynamic, and NPCs need to interact with characters more differently than what is current?

Well, first it'd depend on whether players, or more importantly staff believe that there is even a problem. Without a problem, solutions are moot.

I've got a couple ideas though.

1) Virtual organizations provide staff a manner through which to reinforce  behaviour - as I alluded to in my mention of clans, ic rewards can be given for characters that fit the role well, even if they don't necessarily bring in cash or have coded skill.
That only rewards rp that the organizations feel is positive, and doesn't reward rp in a more general sense.  That does have the benefit of encouraging conformity to documentation though.

2) I'd like to see more support for unconventional roles that don't rely on stats.  Bards, priests, teachers, politicians, messengers, and anything else you can name.  Professions that don't require any coded action on the part of the player, but can allow them to use their coded skills on the side, or in their work, if they so desire.

3) I'm running out of ideas - possibly karma like options as a reward for adherence to documentation, consistency and colourful rp.  The option of starting more veteran characters or something could fit in there.  Leading back to number 2, if there was a non-combat, non-politics, lucrative priest role open in nak it could go to someone that had proven their ability to actually roleplay.  I distinguish that from the current karma system which is more about trust and consistency than rp, to my understanding, and opens up more powerful classes.

Those are just ideas, not particularly well thought out and just off the cuff, I'd rather they not reflect too heavily on the analysis in the first post - I'm not pushing for any particular change here, but interested in an analysis of the game's mechanics.  (Not to discourage any positive change that could rise from such a discussion.)

[Ampere]

3) I'm running out of ideas - possibly karma like options as a reward for adherence to documentation, consistency and colourful rp.  The option of starting more veteran characters or something could fit in there.  Leading back to number 2, if there was a non-combat, non-politics, lucrative priest role open in nak it could go to someone that had proven their ability to actually roleplay.  I distinguish that from the current karma system which is more about trust and consistency than rp, to my understanding, and opens up more powerful classes.

You're right, in that a hands off approach coupled with coded advancement, lends itself to a smidge of twinkage now and again. However, I can appreciate the lines which separate the player base from those that build and nudge ceaslessly.  People take things personally.  How about this: player kudos = skill/stat points @ your next chargen.  Implement a cap of five kudos/month or something to minimize abuse.  Roleplaying's properly rewarded, and staff remain protected behind their bulletproof glass. NEXT!

EDIT: My comments were quoted...which was premature.

[Marauder Moe]

Words cannot fully express my opposition to that idea.

[mansa]

I think that ArmageddonMUD is different than WoW or other MMORPGs, because of the Staff Interaction and the World Changing implementations that they add to the game.  This is why we are able to roleplay in the game, and have fun.  Rather than playing in a world that does not change - we can make change.

We can burn down taverns and erect new ones.  We can create clans, destroy clans, and effect the world as a whole.


Yes, in 2007 there was a decision to stop building the old game, and focus on the new game.  Yes, this decision affected how the game was played, and caused a lot of people to be upset and disenfranchised with ArmageddonMUD.  "You mean I cannot create an item?  I cannot create a clan?  I cannot create a room?  I cannot shape the game I play?  I can't interact with the world?  This isn't roleplay, this is AdventureInZalanthas(tm), a simple rpg.".

However, as the decision was reversed, ( http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,30912.0.html ) the game settled down again, and people started to create again.   As I see it, I get more enjoyment when I can shape the game that I play in.  My most favourite part of the website is on the front page - where it shows the changes that are implemented into the game.  My second favourite part is the History page, where it shows that the game is Dynamic, and constantly has changes happening to it.

When I play characters in Armageddon, I usually try and create something, using those characters.  That's where my fun lies.

[ale six]

I think staggerlee is right on. In a very real sense, Armageddon does place the code before the story, and that's evident in the design philosophy from top to bottom.

For example:
- Deaths are not reversed except in cases of bugs, no matter how stupid or accidental, no matter how many plots they destroy, no matter how ICly ridiculous the death is. If the plots of an entire city are revolving around you, but while alone in your apartment late at night you accidentally fill a cup from a keg of cleanser and drink it, GG. I'm sure this has happened to somebody at least once.

- The weather code can make travel simply unplayable for days on end in some areas. Even if you have a major RPT scheduled for weeks, if it's blinding sands, no luck for you.

- Staggerlee already pointed out incongruities between virtually large, world-spanning organisations and the realities they face when they have a small amount of players.

- Thieves and burglars with a few days spent buffing their skill can pull off some hugely unrealistic things, like raiding entire apartment buildings, and locked estates. You can quit your character out in a one room apartment with all your stuff there and return the next day to find it empty. ICly your character never left. Codedly? Room was empty. Stuff ganked.


Armageddon has moved beyond RP/H&S MUDs in the sense that we have no experience points or levels and character advancement doesn't come solely from killing a million things. However, I think anyone who plays this game looking for a completely immersive, realistic roleplaying experience where things aren't limited by code is ultimately going to come away disappointed. We exist somewhere in a nebulous middle ground, where roleplaying and story are paid homage and given lip service, but at the end of the day, coded skill and stat points still reign supreme.

[Gimfalisette]

I think if you throw in the clan structure as being part of what's hard-coded, in addition to all the other code like combat and magick and guilds...then yeah...I pretty much agree. Code nearly always takes precedence over RP.

I honestly don't know what a system would look like that would reward and encourage RP. I know we have systems in place already that discourage too much reliance on code in some ways--as in, it's pretty clear there are various limits on skill-gain, by time or method. But doing the opposite, actually rewarding RP, seems more difficult.

[staggerlee]

But doing the opposite, actually rewarding RP, seems more difficult.

I don't think the question is how can rp be rewarded, there are plenty of ways to reward rp.
The question is how can rp be rewarded without the staff having to micromanage it.

[flurry]

To a certain extent, I think it's up to the player to decide what is rewarding about playing.

It really depends on what you consider valuable.  Is it physical prowess?  One play style might reward your characters with that.  Is it social power?  Another play style could reward your characters with that.  Wealth?  Knowledge?  Fame?  Etc. etc.

So much of the reward for roleplay comes in the moment, that maybe the best we can do is support those moments happening.  We have a great emote code, which I think goes a long way toward that.  The biography tool, think and feel all are great tools for roleplay.

[Jingo]

The most frusterating part of this game is that code always trumps in pvp.

It doesn't matter that I emoted flicking my spear at a dude while he spam-subdued me. I still get subdued and I die for it.

Or that other dude that would spam-steal from me without consequence with numerous critical failures, he still got what he wanted too. No visable attempt RP despite my own, emoted response.

Or that other dude that knocked me out in a sparring ring. Guess he can kill me without consequence, not like there are any vnpc's around the clan compound.

Or that other dude that spamwalked me into his apartment after I followed him. Who then proceeded to use a macro to draw his weapons and attack me at the same time. (before there was code that added a delay to draw)

So yeah, I try to emote things. Some other dude would rather just spam a command that gives him an advantage. It's the reason I feel pressure to max out my combat skills as quickly as possible.

Good stats + good combat skills = less likelihood of a shitty death.

Now the only question is: What's RP got to do with it?

[musashi]

I sympathize with how annoying a situation like those described above could be, but I can't say that I've ever had anything like that happen to me; and if it did, I would hope that filing a player complaint against the person doing it would get a bit of resolution from the staff.

If you play a MUSH,  I think you'll see that their situation really isn't all that different, it's just that instead of blaming the code for crappy things that happen to their characters, they blame the staff for poor judgement calls that resulted in crappy things that happened to their characters.

The code trumping emoting in something like combat, or someone who is more syntax savvy than myself getting the upper hand on my character, does suck to me, make no mistake, but it's one of those things I think we have to reconcile ourselves to because out of all the problems to choose from, the rare event (rare in my experience anyway) where you try to RP and someone else just plows over you with code is hardly the worst option we could pick.

And whenever a bug or exploit with the code rears its head and players complain that it's being abused ... don't staff change/fix it to try and correct the issue?

[Riev]

It really seems like everyone is trying to describe a MUSH in some way. The simple fact is, there is code to this game, so it -will- take precedence to RP. You can't just stand there, emote throwing a spear at me, and make me -not- have typed in "bash" at the same time, expecting me to have RP'd dodging the spear.

I agree with Musashi on his point. I've never had someone walk up and spam subdue me, and I think this is why delays are added to the code, to prevent stuff like that. I've had some people spam magick on me, kill me while invisible, and a slew of other crap. When/If I feel its abuse, maybe I'll file a complaint, but it doesn't seem like it is much of an issue, at least with me.

I -love- the fact that this game is a mix between code and RP. I wouldn't play if the game was Role-play Only, rather than just intensive. When I die, I want it to be for IC reasons, due to code. Not because the other person has cooler, more flowery emotes.

[Jingo]

It really seems like everyone is trying to describe a MUSH in some way. The simple fact is, there is code to this game, so it -will- take precedence to RP. You can't just stand there, emote throwing a spear at me, and make me -not- have typed in "bash" at the same time, expecting me to have RP'd dodging the spear.

My arguement isn't that you have to emote in a combat situation. My arguement is that you shouldn't behave unrealistically so that the code gives you an advantage. And as far as I'm concerned, if you do that -while- another character is trying to interact, then you're acting in contempt of this game's role-play policy.

[Riev]

Oh, well I agree there. Attempting to disarm 50 times during a fight is just spammy, but there COULD be a reason to try it, I suppose.

I'll admit that I sometimes let the code just do its thing, but if people start emoting, I'll emote right behind them. Some people just can't be trusted with a lot of responsibility with high skills with the code, it happens. Player Complaints do a lot more than we think (or so I hope). They can't get sponsored roles, special apps won't work, loss of karma, and if they really cannot be trusted, a lack of imm support.

Sometimes, as much as I hate it, you have to code first, emote later.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I would far rather code tell me what is happening to me, than RP. Relying on code to establish certain realities is in no way a lack of roleplay. It is following the laws of nature, in the same way that we, here in RL, do.

[staggerlee]

It really seems like everyone is trying to describe a MUSH in some way. The simple fact is, there is code to this game, so it -will- take precedence to RP.

I would far rather code tell me what is happening to me, than RP. Relying on code to establish certain realities is in no way a lack of roleplay. It is following the laws of nature, in the same way that we, here in RL, do.

Obviously code does take precedent over RP, that was my whole point.
My question was as to whether that was intended or desirable, especially as I see it moving increasingly toward a code heavy game in the future.

My second question was as to whether there are ways in which the code or design of the game could encourage and reinforce rp.  As long as code takes precedent and rewards players it seems a touch hypocritical to punish them for 'abuse' of it when they're manipulating it and not roleplaying.  My interest is in finding ways to mitigate that problem, by either changing expectations or tweaking the game itself.

I see a gap between the expectations extolled on the gdb and the kind of behaviour the game actually rewards.  Considering I've often been a strong proponent of the 'rp first' philosophy, it's a point of interest for me.

Alesix brought up some good points... I think a lot about the current gap between expectations and encouraged behavior causes frustration for players. That needs not be.

[LoD]

Code is unbiased, immediate, and consistent.  It treats one person in exactly the same way as the next
without allowing for subjective variables such as prejudice, emotion, or past history.  Code helps us to define the boundaries of our game, but to claim that code trumps RP seems largely idealistic to me. 

Who says that being a courier, teacher, bard, or other non-coded profession is not rewarding or valuable?  Could there be more support for those positions?  I guess, but you begin treading into some areas where there's no discernible way for a machine to determine your success in a way you'll find appropriate.  Musicianship, poetry, interpersonal skills, theatrical ability, choice of content, etc...  Many players would likely be less than enamored were the results of "codifying" such actions, which is only viable way I can see them being consistently and fairly rewarded without requiring extreme micromanagement on the part of the Staff members -- something that they've already mentioned they're trying to reduce with the introduction of Arm 2.0.

Much of the onus is on the players to interpret these gray areas and reward RP.  My belief is that much of the frustration felt by people who attempt such professions is generated by the inherent disparity in experience and variety of opinions on what makes good RP between the player base.  There will always be people at various stages of the game, making the slow progression from code-reliance to code-awareness, or recognizing that conflict doesn't equal violence, rewards require patience, and good things come to those who wait.

Lastly, managing expectations is one of the best ways to keep yourself from becoming disenchanted with the game world and frustrated at your lack of achievement in areas you consider to be unsupported.  My opinion is that anything is possible, but nothing is easy in Armageddon.  And, while many people lament this fact, this goes for small things and big things.  Creating a new item and creating a new village are two very different goals, but both of them will take some time under the current system we have.

I recognize that threads such as these, and the ideas expressed therein, only show how much people really enjoy Armageddon and only want to make it "better" for them and others they feel share their wants.  I certainly wouldn't ever want to stifle people's ambition or claim that there's no room for improvement, or that the game is perfect, or even that everyone enjoys the same things that I enjoy.  However, I don't necessarily agree that it's as bleak or impossible as some people make out, and that players often sabotage themselves by holding too tightly to their ideals or creating character concepts that they fully know won't mesh or vibe with the current code structure.

I'm still not quite sure what "rewards" the OP would like to see for these more "RP based" professions.  Let's take the example of a bard.  Do you want a chance for a populated room to give your character money after a performance?  Do you want there to be subtle coded adjustments after hearing your songs? (i.e. simulation of increased morale, happiness, attention, anger, etc...).

I'd be interested in seeing more suggestions for ways to reward these "RP heavy" roles.

-LoD

[ale six]

Wow! LoD posted! I agree with everything he sai....... oh wait. /fangirl

Code helps us to define the boundaries of our game, but to claim that code trumps RP seems largely idealistic to me.

The idealism here is that RP could somehow trump code. Code trumping RP is a simple, obvious fact. No matter what the RP'd situation, code will always work, unless other code is wielded to stop it.

I don't necessarily think we should change this. I do think the code and the game policy could be made a little less unforgiving. Yes, this would require some more attentiveness and management from the staff, but this is an RP game. It isn't going to be able to run itself. There are times, like the examples I illustrated above, when the code doesn't make good decisions for the game, the players, or the story, and those times need human intervention. Right now there isn't a lot being done to put the story first and foremost.

[staggerlee]

Wow! LoD posted! I agree with everything he sai....... oh wait. /fangirl

Code helps us to define the boundaries of our game, but to claim that code trumps RP seems largely idealistic to me.

The idealism here is that RP could somehow trump code. Code trumping RP is a simple, obvious fact. No matter what the RP'd situation, code will always work, unless other code is wielded to stop it.

I don't necessarily think we should change this. I do think the code and the game policy could be made a little less unforgiving. Yes, this would require some more attentiveness and management from the staff, but this is an RP game. It isn't going to be able to run itself. There are times, like the examples I illustrated above, when the code doesn't make good decisions for the game, the players, or the story, and those times need human intervention. Right now there isn't a lot being done to put the story first and foremost.

This is unfortunately much the conclusion I've come to.  It comes down to the intent of the staff and what they want the game to look like.  If story and roleplaying are intended to be dominant, then alesix is right on about what has to happen.  If the intent of the game is for story and roleplay to color a game that is primarily about combat, exploration, skill advancement or other coded functions - then I'd say the future looks very promising.

I've never really heard a statement of purpose from the staff about Arm 1 or Arm2.0 so I'm not sure what they intend.

However, I don't necessarily agree that it's as bleak or impossible as some people make out, and that players often sabotage themselves by holding too tightly to their ideals or creating character concepts that they fully know won't mesh or vibe with the current code structure.

I've had this issue, but I think it's less about deliberate obstinacy than a misunderstanding of what the game is intended for.. as my posts earlier in this thread explain.  

I don't disagree with you LoD...

Code is unbiased, immediate, and consistent.  It treats one person in exactly the same way as the next
without allowing for subjective variables such as prejudice, emotion, or past history.  Code helps us to define the boundaries of our game, but to claim that code trumps RP seems largely idealistic to me. 

Who says that being a courier, teacher, bard, or other non-coded profession is not rewarding or valuable?  Could there be more support for those positions?  I guess, but you begin treading into some areas where there's no discernible way for a machine to determine your success in a way you'll find appropriate.  Musicianship, poetry, interpersonal skills, theatrical ability, choice of content, etc...  Many players would likely be less than enamored were the results of "codifying" such actions, which is only viable way I can see them being consistently and fairly rewarded without requiring extreme micromanagement on the part of the Staff members -- something that they've already mentioned they're trying to reduce with the introduction of Arm 2.0.

This is all very true, I think I previously suggested as much.  I understand that roleplaying is supposed to be a reward in itself, the question is does the game as it is, and in the direction its going, reinforce and encourage roleplaying? 

It doesn't matter which direction it goes, but if story and rp are to be dominant that needs to be reinforced.  I'm concerned that there's no way to do so without fairly high supervision from staff... LoD the ideas you suggest do bring color to the game, but as you point out aren't necessarily going to help.

As I suggested earlier, staff sponsored roles (that are paid or culturally significant, and in some way powerful in game) for roles that aren't related to their skill set might be a good start. There are a lot of little things that can be done toward encouraging rp, if that's the desire.  If the desire is for a fully automated virtual world with a complete code base and rp to color it... than none of that is necessary.

I'm sorry if I sound ambiguous here, I'm just honestly not sure which direction the game is intended to lie in. An ambiguity bred I'm sure by the game's evolution from its H&S origins.  I'm not sure there is a clean solution to the problem, so don't feel pressured to provide one or take this as an attack on the game or its direction.  There's always going to be a somewhat awkward relationship between code and rp, and they're never going to mesh perfectly.  I suspect that the staff are aware of that and have taken it somewhat into account with their coding of Arm2, but that's purely conjecture on my part, I really have no idea what the staff know or think on the subject, or if its even a concern for them.

[Synthesis]

I think the game strikes an excellent balance between roleplaying and goal-playing.

It would be nice if the code supported additional functionality that would reinforce RP in a hard way...but Armageddon is a continually-evolving project.  The staff will fix the obvious holes in the system, and the ones that aren't so obvious will be debated over endlessly by us players.  Maybe some of them will be fixed.  Maybe some of them will then be un-fixed.

My biggest gripe about the game is that the class system feels so much like a straitjacket at times.  I don't think that has anything to do with the roleplaying aspect of the design philosophy, though....I think it's more a matter of a) a continuation of a tried-and-true paradigm in fantasy gaming and b) an inability (thus far) to design and implement anything that is likely to work better.  I think roleplaying would definitely be more interesting if there were more variation (and in-character flexibility) in the hard-coded skillsets that characters could acquire, but I don't think the limitations we have in 1.Arm are a reflection of the Staff settling on roleplay as a secondary priority.

In fact, there are games out there where the skill, combat, and other supporting systems are infinitely more realistic and complicated, but the quality of actual roleplay in the game is abysmal.  That, I believe, reflects very well on the Staff's ability to promote roleplaying in what is essentially an archaic code environment.  I believe the code clunkiness will be resolved in 2.Arm when the game is dragged out of the dungeon of Diku legacy code.  Once that happens, the Staff will be able to mold the code environment continually such that it more accurately reflects their (and by extension, our) vision of what the roleplaying environment should feel like.

As long as we players continue to roleplay well, the game will only get better over time.

[LoD]

I'm not sure there is a clean solution to the problem, so don't feel pressured to provide one or take this as an attack on the game or its direction.  There's always going to be a somewhat awkward relationship between code and rp, and they're never going to mesh perfectly.

This is likely to persist, despite the innovations or changes planned for Arm 2.0.  There will always be a disconnect between people wants, expectations, and opinions.  It's nearly impossible to think of a solution that perfectly balances all of these variables and integrates them into one tidy package.  I agree with Synthesis that the game strikes a nice balance between the two; code heavy characters can impose their will to some degree, but without any RP - they aren't really contributing to the story, and the lack of socialization and interaction with the PTB (powers-that-be) will curb them from achieving anything of substance.

It's in that way that I stress code doesn't trump RP.  I couldn't have achieved any of the goals that I'd planned without RP, no matter how much coded ability I had at my disposal.  No amount of fighting prowess would have convinced the Lirathuans to sell me the land I needed to build.  No amount of hard coded trading and wealth would've provided me with the contacts and relationships necessary to protect me politically against would-be usurpers to my business.  No amount of coded stealthiness would've provided me with the passion and fire to ignite a dwarven army to fight.

At any rate, I have no doubts that the system will continue to improve as we move from Arm 1.0 to Arm 2.0 and address at least some of the concerns you have regarding the relationship between RP and code.  Until then, it may help your feelings of frustration by developing characters whose concept abides by the actual state of the game, rather than whatever you might perceive as its intended state.

-LoD

[Tlaloc]

I think it's a phallacy to think that code and RP are mutually exclusive. As LoD posts, code gives structure to the universe that is Arm. It gives physics to the World and Universe that is Zalanthas. It's designed to create a (semi) realistic setting, with which to frame and shape the actions of your characters in your RP.

For instance:

- Deaths are not reversed except in cases of bugs, no matter how stupid or accidental, no matter how many plots they destroy, no matter how ICly ridiculous the death is. If the plots of an entire city are revolving around you, but while alone in your apartment late at night you accidentally fill a cup from a keg of cleanser and drink it, GG. I'm sure this has happened to somebody at least once.

IRL, accidents happen all the time. Bad things happen to great people, and no ammount of wishing is going to bring someone back, regardless of the plots they were in. Elvis died on the toilet. Heath Ledger randomly died out of the blue, on the cusp of one of his greatest accomplishments. Their deaths may be stupid, and tragic, but they shape our lives, and we're the players in our own version of Armageddon. This is what makes Arm great: that stupid, tragic things happen every day, and that shapes the survivors lives.

All of that said: during my time on Staff, I've seen PCs spared from death many times, and not simply for bugs. I've seen PCs brought back for drinking from cleanser buckets, from twinky assassinations in apartments (or even in public), and even from perfectly valid and reasonable IC deaths. Each was taken as a case by case basis. Does it mean it's a perfect system? No, but nothing ever is.

- The weather code can make travel simply unplayable for days on end in some areas. Even if you have a major RPT scheduled for weeks, if it's blinding sands, no luck for you.

IRL, people plan major RPTs all the time. They're called weddings. You know what? They get rained out all the time. Again, the code forms the physics and framework of the world. IRL, when people plan outdoor weddings, they also usually have a backup plan in case of poor weather. Finding a solution around the problems the gameworld gives you is part of the experience of roleplaying in a realistic setting.

That said: I've also seen sandstorms done away with when they got in the way of something really important. Again, this is (or was) handled on a case by case basis. If it were me, I would make planning for inclement weather part of the experience of RPing in a world where sandstorms are common.

- Thieves and burglars with a few days spent buffing their skill can pull off some hugely unrealistic things, like raiding entire apartment buildings, and locked estates. You can quit your character out in a one room apartment with all your stuff there and return the next day to find it empty. ICly your character never left. Codedly? Room was empty. Stuff ganked.

Again, I dissagree here. Sure, people can (and do) do these things. But we also call those people twinks, and the current Karma/account system allows the staff to monitor and police these sorts of actions. I've seen player accounts with nothing but 'Human Merchant' as options for play. Why? Because they proved to the Staff that they couldn't handle any other roles realistically. Additionally, LoD makes some excellent points about the dissassociation between PCs who "game" vs. PCs who "Play The Game".

So, I think that the game strikes a pretty good balance. The code provides a real-world setting which (usually) behaves in a predictable and logically structured maner. There is gravity. These things can kill you. Weather can be a bitch. Where the code fails, the Staff can - and often do - step in and assist. I've seen PCs wish up to climb through windows that were only virtual. I've seen PCs hide under virtual cots to try and stage a jailbreak. For me, the game presented it's great potential while I was playing my 3rd PC: the day my character was standing on a rocky road, and I wished up to ask if I could pick up a rock..and one got handed to me. That PC carried that rock for the rest of his life.

The code prevents your dwarven warrior from allowing you to become a feathered kank, name himself Kanklequatle and live on Floof, the Elemental Plane of Downy Feather Pillows. Does this mean code gets in the way of your RP? Not at all: you're welcome try...and you might even succeed. It may be unlikely, as the game presents structure to make that hard, but therein lies the best part - and the reward - of roleplaying.

[fourTwenty]

Code Select Expand


feel a shining burst of reassurance and joy along with the undesirable urge to log in and play right now.
You feel a shining burst of reassurance and joy along with the undesirable urge to log in and play right now.


[staggerlee]

It's not really a fallacy... but it definitely tends toward a false dichotomy.  These conversations tend to gravitate toward extremes, as I'm sure we're all aware. At the heart of it, I'm talking about mechanics encouraging or discouraging certain behaviour, nothing more extreme than that.  I also agree with previous posters that the game has a considerably higher standard of rp than many other examples that could be cited.  But I think we can also agree that it's still a long way from perfect, and I do not see a discussion of those mechanics and how to motivate players and reduce frustration is in any way harmful.  

In a lot of ways Tlaloc you just demonstrated why I think the staff can and should be heavily involved in the day to day affairs of the mud... and it is certainly possible that a properly designed code base could allow them more time to do that kind of thing, if that's something they see as desirable.  It may be the most elegant and effective solution, hopefully the staff already thought of that and have intended as much all along.

[ale six]

I agree with Synthesis that the game strikes a nice balance between the two; code heavy characters can impose their will to some degree, but without any RP - they aren't really contributing to the story, and the lack of socialization and interaction with the PTB (powers-that-be) will curb them from achieving anything of substance.

I don't disagree with this statement by LoD, but I think it in fact reinforces what I'd identify as a problem. Code heavy characters can impose their will to a LARGE degree, and can often be a detriment to plots and other players. I have been a victim of and seen many instances and abuses of this - from twink thieves and burglars to people subduing characters in the middle of the street as soon as they enter rooms.

An example comes to mind of a time back when I played a Borsail noble. One of my character's cousins was very new to his role and had forgotten to bring a guard with him when we went to the Trader's. Another player (apparently a brand new warrior with high strength) took notice of this, and walked into the Trader's Inn, subdued the noble from his table, and proceeded to drag the guy out the inn, down the street, all the way to the rinth, where he proceeded to throw the noble down a well. I don't exactly think this is a realistic situation, yet the code allowed it. I don't even have good suggestions on how to prevent things like that. The only two options I see are much, much more detailed code, (to represent rooms spatially so that you can't subdue a guy from across a tavern, and maybe to make NPCs think "Hey, here's a screaming noble being carried down the street, maybe I should do something.") or much more proactive staff intervention, including retroactively undoing things that don't make sense. But it is an example of how coded skills reign supreme, regardless of if their application is valid or not.

So while you're right, LoD, that code-heavy characters can't achieve anything of substance to the extent you or I have, they can still contribute to the story - to OOC detriment. I think for the game to move towards what it claims to aspire to, that sort of thing needs to be mitigated as much as possible.

Lastly,

Until then, it may help your feelings of frustration by developing characters whose concept abides by the actual state of the game, rather than whatever you might perceive as its intended state.

I find that statement pretty condescending considering you likely have no knowledge of whatever characters staggerlee, I, or anybody else may be developing.

---------

Tlaloc:

This post is getting long, so I won't quote things back at you, but I really do feel like your post illustrates some problems with the system as well. If we want roleplay and story to come first and foremost, it is silly to rationalize, apologise, and make excuses for the game when it falls short. Armageddon is not the real world and while we want to emulate real life, I think the purpose of the game is to create a believable world for storytelling purposes, not imitate the real world exactly.  There are differences between tragic, pointless, heartbreaking deaths, and deaths that are just plain purposeless and stupid. This is Real Life, and it's sad how Elvis and Heath Ledger died, and no amount of wishing can change it. In Armageddon, though, if a character dies by a stupid accident, with no one else involved or aware, and that death kills plots or stories in development, I see no reason they shouldn't come back. I'm glad you say you've seen that happen. I just wish it was the rule and not the exception. My responses to the weather and twinking comments would go along the same lines. It's great if staff are proactive and fix things like that. However, that's not a 100% solution, and as staggerlee said in the thrust of the OP, the staff seems to want to be LESS proactive. If that's the case, we either need far superior code, or we need to examine the philosophy behind the game some.

If the intent of the game is for story and roleplay to color a game that is primarily about combat, exploration, skill advancement or other coded functions - then I'd say the future looks very promising.

That about sums up how I feel. If the intent is something else, I'm not nearly so hopeful.

[LoD]

Until then, it may help your feelings of frustration by developing characters whose concept abides by the actual state of the game, rather than whatever you might perceive as its intended state.

I find that statement pretty condescending considering you likely have no knowledge of whatever characters staggerlee, I, or anybody else may be developing.

This is the reality that I adhere to, and merely suggest it to anyone else that may find themselves frustrated over what they perceive as a disconnect between what "is" and what they think "should be".  I have been similarly frustrated, believing that work I've put into a plot or want was sufficient to see it moved forward only to have it stalled completely.  I wasn't intending to direct the statement toward anyone in particular, but to the general public.

It's been an understanding that has helped me cope with my own issues, and I thought I'd share.  Take it for what it's worth.

-LoD

[flurry]

In a lot of ways Tlaloc you just demonstrated why I think the staff can and should be heavily involved in the day to day affairs of the mud... and it is certainly possible that a properly designed code base could allow them more time to do that kind of thing, if that's something they see as desirable.  It may be the most elegant and effective solution, hopefully the staff already thought of that and have intended as much all along.

I've always thought that the degree of staff presence in day to day affairs is mostly limited by their other responsibilities.  There seems to be a trend toward streamlining some of those things, so that should only help.

There's also the issue that code is impartial, whereas human beings are subject to perceptions of bias and favoritism.

Having said that, I love it when the staff step in and help make the world come alive.  I remember one time I had a magicker who faced a situation where no coded spell would have helped, but I wanted to try something that was perfectly in keeping with her element.  Basically I wanted to manipulate some things in the room a particular way that needed a coded result, but there was no way code was going to get me there (without staff help).  So I wished up and explained what I wanted to do, and sure enough, it happened.

On the flip side, I greatly dislike the sentiment that if the code allows something, it's okay.  Or that the code is the ultimate trump card. I think that attitude leads to a lot of problems, where people rationalize unrealistic skill advancement and resource hoarding because the code permits it.

I believe the code allows elves to ride.  The game docs supersede that.  The code allows characters to spar endlessly, zip back and forth from city to city, craft dozens of silk dresses in a day, rob an apartment building of all its furniture, and so on.  That doesn't make those things okay.

[Zoan]

It's basically in the hands of the 'Dungeon Master' really. And in this game, the DM has generally decided to give us the rights of the Player's Handbook all the while expecting us to use these rules in a characterful fashion.

I know I could run an Eberron game with only the world, without the 'game of failure' methodology that diceroll chances entail. But that's why this is a MUD and not a MUSH. It elects to use unsubjective rules as an overseer. (Subjectively) fair or not it's simply how it must be.

[Delstro]

The code does indeed reward RP.
If we didn't have it, every character would be the best at what they do and noone could prove that they were better. I would walk up to you and this is what would happen:

The Delstro punches you in the face.
You punch the Delstro in the face.
(Repeat until we tire of it)

We both walk away.


Boring.

[Clearsighted]

An example comes to mind of a time back when I played a Borsail noble. One of my character's cousins was very new to his role and had forgotten to bring a guard with him when we went to the Trader's. Another player (apparently a brand new warrior with high strength) took notice of this, and walked into the Trader's Inn, subdued the noble from his table, and proceeded to drag the guy out the inn, down the street, all the way to the rinth, where he proceeded to throw the noble down a well.

It boggles the mind that someone would have that much moxy...To go in, grab a random unguarded noble, and then deliberately drag him all the way to the rinth well. It was a terribly twinky thing to do, but you can't help but admire the sheer bloody minded gall to do something so straightforwardly brutal and yet, somehow creepily deliberate, with a brand new warrior. Talk about carpe diem...