Armageddon Community should make a stronger effort to stop witch-hunting twinks.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I'd probably leave if the game became more of a mush than the hybrid it is now. I love RP to the fullest, but I also love the advancement of my skills. I'm not saying there's no room for improvement, but I'd really dislike less code. In fact, I'm usually a proponent of more code, so I suppose my stance is rather clear cut.

Code to encourage RP and realism is ok.

On topic, though, I still think players waste too much time worrying about other players and not enough time worrying about themselves.

[X-D]

Alright, maybe the key word here is "depicting". Certainly emoting will add color to a character's existence, and speaking will make him or her potentially more interesting. But I don't label them as necessities for roleplay. You can stay absolutely true to the role you have in mind without doing either. Staying true to concept is the definition of roleplaying to me. You can emote all you want and still be a poor roleplayer

I am quoting this point simply because  it is nearly word for word what Sanvean posted on the subject several years ago(pretty sure it was her, or another staffer at or above highlord so carries the same weight no matter what).  I'd look up the staff posts on the subject but the search function on this GDB blows chunks.

Also this.

On topic, though, I still think players waste too much time worrying about other players and not enough time worrying about themselves

[Thunkkin]

if code spam wasn't such a large part of most characters' lives

*Inigo voice* You keep using that word ... I don't think spam does what you think it does.

[FantasyWriter]

I still think players waste too much time worrying about other players and not enough time worrying about themselves.

[Comrade Canadia]

[edited because I was completely garbled]

I'm not trying to talk about how other people are bad roleplayers. Salt Merchant's "you don't need to think/feel/emote/say in order to roleplay" set me off, but it's not relevant to the topic. What I'm trying to illustrate is this:

1. Armageddon prides itself on setting a high level of realistic roleplay.

2. The code structure Armageddon is built on encourages video-game style play which is all about increasing numbers to the point that this is prefential in many circumstances to roleplayed solutions.

ERGO the nature of the game creates behaviour it condemns.

That said, I think I've said my peace on this and will shut up unless something intriguing is said.

[jstorrie]

2. The code structure Armageddon is built on encourages video-game style play which is all about increasing numbers to the point that this is prefential in many circumstances to roleplayed solutions.

I think this is unnecessary hyperbole. Twinks who really understand the codebase understand that one of the basic facts of Zalanthas is that there's always, always someone bigger than you... even when you're playing a were-spider psi-Nilazi vampire slay-beast with skill_parry. The numbers are only one of many factors which lead to the 'win', and social influence is still much, much more potent–especially since social influence often is enough to get staff support, which is far more potent than having maxxxed skills.

I would counter-argue that for the most part 'PvE'-type interaction in Armageddon is relatively boring. Armageddon encourages social interaction, not skill-grinding, on the pure basis of its skill-grinding activities all being incredibly dull. Ask any twink how tedious it was to grind up skill_bandage, or skill_rescue, or how many lizards they had to kill to branch skill_parry. I'm pretty sure they'll say something along the lines of "God, I could not wait to get back to PLOT." Moreover, the moment they did get their jacked-up Super Amos back to Plot Land they got killed by mantis/halflings/magickers/NPC templar super-agents/another twink anyway.

[Salt Merchant]

Moreover, the moment they did get their jacked-up Super Amos back to Plot Land they got killed by mantis/halflings/magickers/NPC templar super-agents/another twink anyway.

Take heed, everyone. This is the truth.

[SMuz]

I wrote a highly flammable response, which was true and kept civil, but it's going to make a lot of people defensive and send this thread spiraling towards its doom. Not worth it. Twinks and twink hunters can go an' fight each other as they like. I like both of them equally. Just leave me out of your fights.

Let the staff handle twinkishness. That's their job and our job is to worry about our own characters.

Armageddon is a game where the roleplaying was built around the code and will probably stay that way. If you think it's solely about roleplaying, you're kidding yourself; just look with how quickly 'more realistic' RP suggestions are shot down, compared to 'more realistic' code suggestions. And how I love it. It allows conflict to be handled realistically. MUSHes will never have the kind of conflicts that Armageddon has.

Twinking helps you win those conflicts. Sure. But it leaves you vulnerable to other types of conflicts.. and those same twinks turn into twink hunters when that happens. Forgive me if I roll my eyes when your 1 million 'sid apartment gets robbed by an off-peaker.

[NoteworthyFellow]

I'd probably leave if the game became more of a mush than the hybrid it is now. I love RP to the fullest, but I also love the advancement of my skills. I'm not saying there's no room for improvement, but I'd really dislike less code. In fact, I'm usually a proponent of more code, so I suppose my stance is rather clear cut.

Code to encourage RP and realism is ok.

On topic, though, I still think players waste too much time worrying about other players and not enough time worrying about themselves.

Pretty much this.

Armageddon is not a MUSH. It's also not a hack-and-slash DIKU MUD. It's a hybrid, and I think a pretty well-balanced one. If the scales were tipped too much more towards MUSH, I think we'd lose a lot of our best players, and, unrelated to that, I know I'd quit, too. The arbitrary limits on skill growth seen in some other RPI MUDs sort of kills the enjoyment for me--not because I can't "twink," but because it feels arbitrary and tacked-on. It makes the skill system too obvious even as it limits abuse.

Many of you are saying that we all talk a big game about being all about roleplay. We do. I'll admit that. But maybe we should stop, because I'm going to go out on a limb and say that many of our best players enjoy coded skill-building as much as they enjoy the roleplay. Whether that's right or wrong, well, I'm not going to say my judgment is the only correct one, but I think it's completely fine. Armageddon is roleplay-enforced, and roleplay-intensive, but it's not roleplay-exclusive, and I really don't think it should be.

As a community, I think we ought to stop pretending that the game is as roleplay-exclusive as we say it is, because it causes misconceptions about what is or isn't "twinking" or "code abuse." Those things do exist, when skill-building practices push the boundaries of realism like going out bahamet-hunting because you know you can survive a few hits and flee and it'll be good for your defense skill, or standing out in a place where your Krathi's mana will regenerate quickly and spam-casting for hours on end with only a few emotes here or there to differentiate you from a robot. And when these things happen, the staff corrects the problem--I should know, I've been reprimanded for it myself and have since changed my ways. A realistic dedication to skill-building and a knowledge of how the code works, well, that can work well within the bounds of realism.

I don't expect that this will be a popular sentiment, but I stand by it. Let's stop pretending we don't care about skills, because I assure you, more of us do care than are willing to admit it. Let's stop pretending that intricate code knowledge gained from player experience and use of that knowledge (not abuse, which, as I said, the staff is really good at catching) is a bad thing, because I really don't think it is.

[Comrade Canadia]

Okay, I'll bite. I'm only human.

Nobody here is asking for a MUSH. For the love of God, it's brought up constantly as an example of what people don't want armag to be and completely missing what I'm trying to say. If I wanted to play a MUSH, I'd play a fucking MUSH. Stop intentionally misinterpreting my arguments and exaggerating them into idiocy.

The RPI-mud blend of code and roleplay is the best possible way to construct a roleplaying game. However, that doesn't mean that the way in which the code and roleplay are blended is without fault. Armageddon has grown out of hack & slash roots, and because of that the basic underpinnings of that system still exist in the game. I feel that they are antithetical to good roleplay, and it's worth our time to either say I'm wrong, or agree with me and then figure out ways in which the code can be used to further roleplay while still maintaining the highly interactive world.

There are arguments which say that the game naturally balances these disparate elements out to create a harmony in which we all thrive. This addresses what I've been saying, so it'll get a response.

I think this is coming from regular players who really enjoy the game, and thus don't think anything is wrong because it's fun. I may be wrong, but I get the impression I'm being told "It's not broke, don't fix it." It doesn't naturally balance out. The game is putting too much weight on code, and I can see it reflected in the playerbase. People seem to be far more code-savvy now than they were five years ago when I last played. Hell, I remember when pkill was never a term used in this game and now it's bandied about all over. I think that's indicative of the times, and it's not a roleplaying term.

If you think it's solely about roleplaying, you're kidding yourself; just look with how quickly 'more realistic' RP suggestions are shot down, compared to 'more realistic' code suggestions.

This is right on the money. What I'm arguing about is completely futile because the staff have already made up their minds to continue to give the code authority over player roleplay rather than player roleplay authority over code. I don't think this is a good path - thus my excessively enjoying my board privileges in order to dissent.

[Cerelum]

I refused to comment in a thread where the OP can't spell community...doh! Damnit, I just did it.

[Marauder Moe]

If you're asking for roleplayed emoted actions to trump coded actions, then you are asking for a MUSH.

[Dakurus]

This is right on the money. What I'm arguing about is completely futile because the staff have already made up their minds to continue to give the code authority over player roleplay rather than player roleplay authority over code. I don't think this is a good path - thus my excessively enjoying my board privileges in order to dissent.

Since you're enjoying your board privileges excessively, why don't you list and argue the merits of both approaches. There are benefits to both, which is why there's typically a compromise. I'm sure there's a audience including me, that is interested in seeing it all layed out, as you see it, and folks willing to contribute.

[Cerelum]

Since I already screwed up and posted in this thread... I'll toss my two cents in.  Mush's suck horribly, because there it's not backed up by code.

Here at least you know that unless a staff member has specifically tweaked someone's skills to make it easier to kill you it's going to be fair.  In a mush it's all like the scene in "Role Models"... "I killed you!" "No I had a spell of deflection on myself and you couldn't have touched me!"

[Comrade Canadia]

Okay Dakurus, I'll see if I can't lay this out properly. Chances are this will be flawed and I'll get my ass reamed over coals, but it'll be constructive!

Armageddon's Current System (and what it means to me:

- Players start weak.

- Skills are increased by endlessly practicing them.

- In order to become even competent at basic skill-related tasks, it's required that you practice your skills ad nauseaum.

- Unpublished knowledge such as what branches from what, how to circumvent powergaming code, what areas to work out your skills in, which mobs are best to skillup on, and a variety of other bits of knowledge become highly desierable amongst the playerbase.

- In addition, more code is being created to allow players to interact with the game world without requiring any roleplay. You can now clean your clothes, pick up mount shit, mine obsidian, pick cotton and do several other things with no human interaction whatsoever.

- As a result, people become focused on figuring out ways to take advantage of the code in order to further their characters and metagame the hell out of everything. You can become buff and rich without any human interaction or emotes - twinks are born.

Comrade's Ideal System (feel free to tear this apart):

- Players start from weak to basically competent, depending on age and background. A sixteen year old would be pretty useless to start, as most teens are - a thirty year old wouldn't embarass him/herself fighting a tregil.

- Skills are increased gradually as players age, with the benefit of in-game skill spam reduced significantly. The goal of this is to get players to interact on a more meaningful level with the game world and worry less about making sure their skills are regularly exercized. Reasoning here is that if two guards work alongside each other, and one plays eight hours a day with the other playing two hours a day - they shouldn't be vastly different skillwise because they still exist virtually. The eight hour player by all means should be better, but not to the extent they are currently. Therefore, count virtual time spent practicing skills. More casual players aren't left behind as much, and everybody is interacting with people instead of code.

- Institute some sort of system which means that character roleplay can assist in the rate your stats increase. I'm hazy on this and the only ideas I have would be screamed down immediately. Suggestions welcome. A perfect example is say... a bored sergeant takes her privates out for a patrol. An entirely virtual scenario with some combat is created by the sergeant, who leads the privates to victory. Why this? Because it's more fun than nothing happening at all or mindlessly slaughtering gurth. A few regular scenes like this will result in a faster rate of skill increase for those who are participating.

- The result of this is that practice + roleplay + age = badass. If you cut any of those, you become less badass. If you do nothing but age, you'll be able to do your job, but not well at all. I would like to see some other factors included in order to create more variety in skill level - but not have that variety solely predicated on who powergames more.

- Less emphasis on coding every single facet of the game world and instead move that into the realm of virtual space players create through emotes and whatnot.

- Focus on code which brings players together to roleplay and create situations where people can make money and further themselves. Rather than giving isolated people ways to make money, I'm more interested in giving isolated people the opportunity to roleplay with someone and make money through those means.

- End result is that hiding in a corner and code-spamming becomes far less desirable when there are more entertaining options available, the twink problem (which will never go away) is just not as much of an issue, and we enter a magical age where we all speak French and have 2% body fat.

[Dakurus]

Interesting and worthy of discussion, but what I was specifically talking about is your conclusion bolded below. You are suggesting that roleplay over code is better then code over roleplay. This is what I was asking you to lay out the merits of, both sides. Because both sides have merit, and both should be arguable. While bias and opinion exists in almost any medium, it should be possible in most cases to remove those shackles and show that one can approach them from both sides, presenting a clear picture.

This is right on the money. What I'm arguing about is completely futile because the staff have already made up their minds to continue to give the code authority over player roleplay rather than player roleplay authority over code. I don't think this is a good path - thus my excessively enjoying my board privileges in order to dissent.

[Cerelum]

I personally think that each character should be generated and started at their skills based on their background and age.

Keeping the coded restrictions on age in play (Get weaker when your older, but get wiser etc) <--stab in the dark, don't think or know if it's true but I'm taking an educated guess.

This way there is no teenagers who are absolute beasts through RL months of IC twinkery or very heavyily used skills spam (The difference between twinkery and powergaming is often just a few emotes IMO)

This way it would require a longer approval time with Admin, but the admin should create some type of criteria where they look at a history of say a teenager who's done nothing but suck on his mommy's booby for 17 years then decide to be an assassin and give him minimal or starter skills as it is now.

However if you've got an application in front of you where the fellow spent ten years with the Byn, another ten working for Lord Fancypants of the purple brigade as an assassin as well as being a personal escort to said FancyPants.  He should start higher.

In essence making almost every application have a bit of approval along with it more than currently is and having the apps with warrent tweaked to make sense.

A 40 year old veteran of countless battles is not going to start out the game unable to kill a scrab, it just ISN'T going to happen if this stuff was taken into effect.  But a teenager might very well end up being eaten.

I personally find sometimes that warriors are the deadliest guild around if people spend the time to twink/powergame their sparring and do it rigerously for a few months rl.  Where their concept itself is never taken into account.

And before someone says it, I'm well aware that you can special app to have what I'm suggesting be done, but we only get two of those a year and I don't think it's fair to ask everyone to start out as a whelp skillwise or create characters based on being weaklings to get better, or worse yet, faking the funk and acting like a hardass when you codedly can't kill a tregil.

Dunno, I've never really agreed with the system all that much because as that other long winded fellow said, everyone and their mom knows ways around the coded restrictions and how to escape detection of the admins.

Just my two cents

[Comrade Canadia]

Sorry Dakurus, let me clarify then, and I think this is a large philisophical difference between myself (and the few who agree with me) and staff. I think the system I outlined above sort of jives with what I'm talking about, but let me try to be clear and actually answer your question.

Code over Virtual

The code-over-player RP philosophy which I believe (my impression) the staff is firmly on side dictates that the game world will become more immersive if minuitae is removed from the virtual realm of player roleplay, and brought into the 'physical' realm of code.

Dirty clothes are an example. By coding dirty clothes, the idea is that the game world becomes more immersive because the clothes realistically will get dirtier over time, and require cleaning with the application of soap. If the clothes are bloodied - that player has been in a fight. If the clothes are dusty, dude has been running in a sandstorm.

Coupled with this has been the creating of code-only jobs which a player can sustain him/herself by. Mining and cotton picking, for example, don't require human interaction whatsoever. This means that players who play solo roles can supplement, or drive their income by going out and mining, lessening player reliance on clans to make a living.

Another interesting thing I've noticed is that the resurrection policy seems to have tightened. The drinking cleaning fluid thing, for example. Once the code decides you are dead, you are dead. There have been a billion reasons discussed for this, but the important rule is that the code is law.

Virtual Over Code

I'm phrasing these as arguments against the current system as it's just easier for me that way.

The reason why I argue against moves like this is that the code isn't smart enough to actually work with player roleplay. With clothes becoming stained, what happens if my player is a noble in a clan with no other PCs? Well, SOMEBODY is washing those clothes because I'm a damn noble. But the code dictates the clothes don't get clean unless somebody cleans them - so there I am scrubbing away. What this has also lead to is people using soap like a scrub brush in two seconds with a cursory emotes in order to get stains out. In a sense, this code has made things -less- realistic for me because it forces people to just run through the motions of cleaning themselves regardless of circumstance. It'd just be more realistic for me to assume I'm cleaning my clothes during my offline time, or be a rare bird who goes out of his way to create a scene where I clean up for the hell of it. The code is not smart enough to arbitrate this little bit of roleplay, and so players should be left to it.

To further illustrate my point, there was a question of why there isn't a quick ooc tool that would llet you know if your clan-mates have been around. This was shot down because it's ooc knowledge. However, in another thread, the idea of dusts gathering on chests was considered great - and somebody mentioned you could use that to tell if a player had been active.

This again creates very unrealistic roleplay by coding things in game rather than giving players knowledge which they can then imprat in game in a realistic manner. If my lover is missing, I'd be asking around the vnpcs and getting quick responses - which an ooc tool would do. Instead, I'm guided to go inspect her locker's dust level and draw conclusions from that because I'm reacting to code and not roleplaying in a believable manner. My roleplay becomes tied down by the code, rather than enhanced by it, which is the purpose of an RPI mud.

Then we also get to the twinking topic. If you haev the OOC knowledge about how to pump up your skills, you'll do just that, and have tha advantage over someone who doesn't have that knowledge - no matter what your characters actually are. As well, it encourages people who make new characters to spend the first three days of their life obsessively twinking up in order to get to a level of competence. Many people continue doing this the rest of their character's lives because learning how to work the code is, in many cases, a  great way to get what you want in terms of money/power/killing enemies and often better than roleplayed alternatives.

I also believe that the res policy is far too restrictive. If somebody dies in an stupid, improbable or unrealistic manner, they should be propped back up, and the players who witnessed it given a reasonable excuse as to why they didn't completely die. Roleplay should trump code in this case, but code trumps the roleplay.

There's more of this, but I hope that I've correctly understood what you're asking of me here, heh.

[Marauder Moe]

Comrade, you seem to be implying exclusivity where it only very rarely exists.

In your dirty clothes example, no one is telling you that your noble can't emote vNPC doing the actual cleaning while you personally input the commands.  That's a great example of cooperation between the code and emoted actions (also, seriously, stop using the word "roleplay" and I think your arguments will become much clearer).

The notion of "code over roleplay" only pertains to situation where there is a direct conflict between emotes and code.  While it's OK for you to emote vNPCs cleaning your clothes, it's not OK for you to emote that your clothes are actually spotless when they have coded bloody/stained/smelly tags on them.

Also I think the phrase "code-only jobs" is silly.  There's no reason you can't emote while doing those jobs.  There's no reason you can't team up with a friend to do those jobs.  There's no reason you can't come into conflict with a rival doing these jobs.

[Ampere]

You know how this could be resolved, actual accountability, you staff are so eager to be seen as professional, how about allowing the registered playerbase to vote on amendments to the mandate?  I put forward a motion to form a mandate review committee, and I nominate Comrade Canadia in that capacity.

Do I have a second...on both points?

Oh wait, that might be dangerous given the majority vote for changes to the resurrection policy...sorry forgot about that.

[Lizzie]

There's changes to the resurrection policy? When did that happen? I must've slept through it. What is it now and where's the thread please? (I never really paid attention to the -old- policy because I've never had a character I wanted resurrected).

[mansa]

There aren't any.
I wish there was.

[Ampere]

There's changes to the resurrection policy? When did that happen? I must've slept through it. What is it now and where's the thread please? (I never really paid attention to the -old- policy because I've never had a character I wanted resurrected).

I said a majority vote in favour of, not actual changes: http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,35324.0.html.

[Comrade Canadia]

Okay, swearing off of the word roleplay because the word -is- becoming meaningless largely due to my bandying it about.  

Moe - you're absolutely right about how people can bring some real life to those code-only jobs. The trick, however is that it's not required, and many people don't feel the need to do it. I'm indicating that the system we have now creates an environment ripe focus on skill development over character development. I'm not saying that everybody does it - the game has many amazing players who bring life to everything they do, no matter how coded the situation. However, using think/feel/emote/say in these situations is optional and not necessary. Jobs which require that you interact with other players do require use of these commands, and thus why I'd prefer we create ways to bring people together, rather than ways to make being apart more rewarding.

The flags on clothes do force responses, but I find that with most players the response is to toss out an emote, spend two seconds scrubbing, and go on with his/her day. Soap doesn't really work like that, and although it falls to the player to make using soap a more interesting experience, most people skip acting out the mandatory laundry scene and just go on with what they were doing. Because of this, although I understand the intent behind the code, I don't feel it's improving the game world and instead causing people to throw out a few quick commands before they go do something they like.

[staggerlee]

Okay, swearing off of the word roleplay because the word -is- becoming meaningless largely due to my bandying it about.  

Moe - you're absolutely right about how people can bring some real life to those code-only jobs. The trick, however is that it's not required, and many people don't feel the need to do it. I'm indicating that the system we have now creates an environment ripe focus on skill development over character development. I'm not saying that everybody does it - the game has many amazing players who bring life to everything they do, no matter how coded the situation. However, using think/feel/emote/say in these situations is optional and not necessary. Jobs which require that you interact with other players do require use of these commands, and thus why I'd prefer we create ways to bring people together, rather than ways to make being apart more rewarding.

The flags on clothes do force responses, but I find that with most players the response is to toss out an emote, spend two seconds scrubbing, and go on with his/her day. Soap doesn't really work like that, and although it falls to the player to make using soap a more interesting experience, most people skip acting out the mandatory laundry scene and just go on with what they were doing. Because of this, although I understand the intent behind the code, I don't feel it's improving the game world and instead causing people to throw out a few quick commands before they go do something they like.

I agree with the direction Comrade Canadia wants to see the MUD go. I think a lot of good arguments have been lost in this thread under a hail of flaming and smugly superior quips. (From both sides of the argument, plus comments completely unrelated to the argument)  Arguing over whether or not you need to use emotes to role play is beyond pointless, and entirely beside the point.

A few points of clarification:

1) I've never suggested that the MUD should have more rp, only that the current system encourages and rewards  heavy code use, which is often deemed undesirable by members of the community. I believe that's the root of the problem underlined in the thread's title, and creates a lot of conflict.

2) I think that part of the reason the code is often desired to be absolute, is that it's impartial. I can understand it from a staff perspective: A rinther running around in silks and jewels is bad, but the moment staff step in and use room echoes to illustrate the character's shit smell, the player feels picked on. Solution? Coded stink on rinthers. Less staff support required, and less martyrs in the player base.

3) Nobody (to my knowledge) wants less code, or a MUSH environment. We just want code that encourages cooperation and interaction. Tools to tell stories, with the code used to mediate conflict and reinforce a "game" element with chance, risk, and reward. The most important aspect of the code however is to mediate conflict, when two player's unique interpretations of the world meet. We clearly don't all get along, so how do we tell a cohesive story without resorting to real life bloodshed? The code is there to ensure that a thief can steal from a noble, if he's good enough, that a brawler can punch out an ox, if he's good enough, and that there's an objective way to determine whether he is that good. Mediating conflict.