Who C

[brytta.leofa]

We discussed this for some time on staff side, and determined that to make things consistent across all clans, we should remove this from all clans.
Player-to-player (or rather, character-to-character) contact is something that we encourage rather than reliance on a who-list.

I am one of those awful staff members who was for who c being removed.  Why?  Because it is an ooc construct.  Why should anyone automagickally know who in their clan is online at any given time, when they can just as easily take IC measures to find them?  I find the ability to do such a thing jarring and unrealistic.

We made the decision we made because we feel it improves the game by leveling the playing-field for all clans and removing a very OOC-driven and OOC-driving feature from the game.

(emphasis added)

Trying to get back to staff's reasons for removing the command (vs. the various reasons that some players dislike it, which may or may not be the same).  I think I'm hearing precisely two expressed:
(1) As players, they have experienced it as breaking immersion.
(2) It has created (or might create) accusations of favoritism between clans.

Am I fairly correct, guys?  Am I missing or mangling something?

[WarriorPoet]

For what it's worth, I wasn't trying to flame staff or start the thread out in an angry tone... Sorry if it seemed that way.

I just think that removing one of the legitimate, in-game ways we have of facilitating roleplay and fostering interaction within our clans is more harmful than helpful. I personally never even knew that AoD and the like got the command. But I loved it for the tiny little fringe tribes and the like, seeing it more as a mental bond built up through tribal ties and total dependance on one another, rather than some OOC construct.

If it's a problem if it being a purely OOC mechanism, then instead of ripping it entirely, change the syntax slightly and give a stun penalty.

>WHOCLAN or PSICLAN or whatever...

>You concentrate super hard and put out your mental-feeler thingies to your clanmates.
-50stun

>You psionically bump into WP's psionic psi-ness.

Or some such shit. Anything that helps IG interaction is a good thing, for my money, and things that hurt the social aspect of the game are bad.

[FantasyWriter]

Sounds cool, WP.  Two thumbs up!

[staggerlee]

Gimf, your argument seems counter productive.... if there are only three or four TM at a time, they need who C much less that Kurac with 22 PCs who they are going to have to try and contact.  Three or four people you can try to contact three times each in less than a minute and know who's online.  In a very active GMH, you could spend a whole IC day going through your rosters, while laying down to minimalyze stun loss, and still not try everyone.

Contact is an ic fix for an ooc problem: connecting online pcs.
Contact may also not be a viable option for people that are traveling, sparring, using contact for other purposes, sleeping, or drinking, among other things.

[Gimfalisette]

Gimf, your argument seems counter productive.... if there are only three or four TM at a time, they need who C much less that Kurac with 22 PCs who they are going to have to try and contact.  Three or four people you can try to contact three times each in less than a minute and know who's online.  In a very active GMH, you could spend a whole IC day going through your rosters, while laying down to minimalyze stun loss, and still not try everyone.

I recommend you re-read. I am saying that if/when a new solution to facilitate intra-clan interaction is implemented, the case of a scattered-iso clan like the TM needs to be considered for the solution, rather than designing the solution solely for the use of a GMH- or militia-type clan. I played a Sergeant in the AoD, so I am well-aware of the prior usefulness of who c for managing a roster; in an iso clan like the TM, the use is slightly different--it was more about solo-RPing crafting or hunting, while simultaneously attempting to psionically contact every Amos you ever even smiled at in the city-states, while also keeping a vigilant eye on who c so you don't miss any shred or scrap of potential interaction.

[FantasyWriter]

I'm pretty sure the players wanting a who-c-like thingy DO want it for everyone.  I can't seem to find any contradiction to that?

[Gimfalisette]

I'm pretty sure the players wanting a who-c-like thingy DO want it for everyone.  I can't seem to find any contradiction to that?

What I was responding to was LoD's specific suggestion about how an NPC could be used. If not implemented correctly, the solution could be a non-solution for a clan like the TM. I think it would potentially work really well for the militia/Legions (IF the NPC is located in a place accessible to recruits, and the recruits codedly can use it), also very well for the GMHs (IF there is one at each GMH estate), really well for Circle bards (IF it can be placed in a public location but coded only for the use of clan members). There are lots of different clan situations and structures, and I'd recommend if the imms are going to work on a solution, then they solicit a lot of player feedback about how it would actually be used.

[aruna]

Cute helpfile, I believe I and others already explained why using 'contact' is not a fully suitable replacement.

Multiple times, even.

I'm out.

The only reasons people have said why using CONTACT is not fully suitable is that CONTACT is not 100% fail resistant, and it takes -time- to contact people.

As a perhaps untouched issue with contact as the only replacement for who c...

It can often be the case, especially within a tight-knit family clan like the TM, that there are complexities and conflicts between characters that can make casual "Hey uh... how's it going?" psionic contact awkward, and in rarer cases, unfeasible. I've been in a situation like this myself, but just because there's conflict between characters doesn't mean they can't/don't want to interact. Who c made it easier for said characters to "run into" each other in game, because you're aware when other players are on and can make your character more accessible, if he/she isn't already.

[mansa]

::edit::
What I wrote was a little bit more snarky than that I wanted to say.

What would be better is to repost this:

There is thousands of different things you can code to mimic the intention of the code - which is to allow players within clans to more easily play with each other.
I prefer an In-Character skill rather than an OOC tool, because that allows the other players of the game to interact with them, because they are acting in game.
I'd prefer that everybody has access to these skills (or bonuses) as soon as they join any clan.

[brytta.leofa]

Just because you want to hide from mindbenders doesn't mean that you should have a special command to do so.

You want to remove barrier??

[aruna]

The complexities and conflicts I was referring to have nothing to do with mindbenders, nor hiding, for that matter.

[Gimfalisette]

Just because you want to hide from mindbenders doesn't mean that you should have a special command to do so.

This is completely messed-up and uncalled-for. What aruna was describing is conflict between family members, not a desire to avoid mindbenders; which I, playing a 100% mundane PC amongst other mundane PCs in the Tan Muark AND in the AoD, also experienced. Your assumptions about other players in this thread and elsewhere are just wrong on so many levels, and I suggest you work on dropping your years-old grudge against any and all who ever may even dare to contemplate playing a Tan Muark PC.

[FantasyWriter]

I'm pretty sure the players wanting a who-c-like thingy DO want it for everyone.  I can't seem to find any contradiction to that?

What I was responding to was LoD's specific suggestion about how an NPC could be used. If not implemented correctly, the solution could be a non-solution for a clan like the TM. I think it would potentially work really well for the militia/Legions (IF the NPC is located in a place accessible to recruits, and the recruits codedly can use it), also very well for the GMHs (IF there is one at each GMH estate), really well for Circle bards (IF it can be placed in a public location but coded only for the use of clan members). There are lots of different clan situations and structures, and I'd recommend if the imms are going to work on a solution, then they solicit a lot of player feedback about how it would actually be used.

Ah, apologies, I understand now.

[spawnloser]

So you simply want a replacement for 'who c' or you want 'who c' back... which plenty of people are violently opposed to.  Some people will only be happy with a way that does not drip of OOC-ness, like 'who c' does.

[Eloran]

So you simply want a replacement for 'who c' or you want 'who c' back... which plenty of people are violently opposed to.  Some people will only be happy with a way that does not drip of OOC-ness, like 'who c' does.

I think it's fair to say we're close to evenly torn on this. I'm all for devising a medium to bring both sides together.

WP's idea, or even LoD's, or the simple yet effect expansion of who that at least alerts you people in your clan -are on- without giving you their true name.

[FantasyWriter]

I think WP has come up with the best alternative so far.

If it's a problem if it being a purely OOC mechanism, then instead of ripping it entirely, change the syntax slightly and give a stun penalty.

>WHOCLAN or PSICLAN or whatever...

>You concentrate super hard and put out your mental-feeler thingies to your clanmates.
-50stun

>You psionically bump into WP's psionic psi-ness.

Or some such shit. Anything that helps IG interaction is a good thing, for my money, and things that hurt the social aspect of the game are bad.

PS: I like LOD's as well.

[Gimfalisette]

So you simply want a replacement for 'who c' or you want 'who c' back... which plenty of people are violently opposed to.  Some people will only be happy with a way that does not drip of OOC-ness, like 'who c' does.

No, I really don't care what form the solution takes, just that there IS a solution, and that it is equally useful to all clans. I think an NPC-type solution has other potentially interesting code bits that could be added to it, such as "if in clanned area, allow unclanned but in clan garb to access information," which would facilitate some spy work. My point continues to be that the individual needs of ALL the clans should be taken into account, so that the solution is useful to ALL.

[Adhira]

I know that this upsets some people, and players have raised a lot of different reasons and outcomes both for and against it's reimplementation, however, who c will not be reinstated.

What we may consider are other IC alternatives to assist all clans with communication. I'd suggest that people focus on brainstorming some alternatives as staff will take these into consideration when looking at the issue.

[Eloran]

Hindsight and all, don't you think a transition would have worked a bit more smoothly if you'd had a plan in place before giving who c the axe?

It could be months before players are given an alternative.

[Adhira]

No. We may consider this, based on player reaction. I'm also perfectly happy to leave this as is and having nothing put in place.

[Simple]

Get your thinking caps on boys and girls.

[Eloran]

Someone start a separate thread, quick.

[AmandaGreathouse]

Moved.

[flurry]

I was genuinely surprised by this thread. I've never had the opportunity to use who c, and I never realized how valued it was. I always thought it sounded a little out of place, but maybe I'd have a different opinion if I were in a clan that had it.

[Thunkkin]

I was genuinely surprised by this thread. I've never had the opportunity to use who c, and I never realized how valued it was. I always thought it sounded a little out of place, but maybe I'd have a different opinion if I were in a clan that had it.

My anecdotal experience: I've seen a leader, who had access to this command, make sure that everyone was involved in something and that the moment we had sufficient RP/fire-power online for something, we were doing it.  I'm sure this leader could have pulled it off without Who C, but damn, things came to together quick and if that leader was around, they were immediately getting anyone who logged in involved.

Templars, who should have soldiers at their side with a snap of the fingers, shouldn't have to sit around spamming contact.  Likewise, it's bizarre that the norm for mere grunts is to waltz into a Templar's minds just to say, "Uh. Hi.  Private Pissbuckets here.  Just, you know, seeing if you were, you know, around."  But, looks like we have to do some OOC things in order to facilitate game play.  Hey ... wait a minute!!!