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

[Eloran]

It isn't that people shouldn't express opinions, or shouldn't push their agenda, but that it would be optimal if they would consider both sides of the coin, or tailor their suggestions to take the opposite viewpoint into account and express why they feel both sides of the coin win as a result.

I thought it was pretty self evident how both sides "win" as a result of focusing on roleplay as opposed to code. At least, it was to me.

[SMuz]

Well, if you're really focusing on the roleplay, it's tough to not win. Sometimes the character doesn't, but hey, you get a good story out of it anyway

[NoteworthyFellow]

It isn't that people shouldn't express opinions, or shouldn't push their agenda, but that it would be optimal if they would consider both sides of the coin, or tailor their suggestions to take the opposite viewpoint into account and express why they feel both sides of the coin win as a result.

I thought it was pretty self evident how both sides "win" as a result of focusing on roleplay as opposed to code. At least, it was to me.

That's very true, and you can focus on roleplay with the current code. Really, you can.

I still stand by this definition of twinking and code abuse: "Actions undertaken to increase skill levels that are patently unrealistic." Sparring for an entire IC day straight, then continuing into the next day? Pretty damn unrealistic. Spam-casting in an area where your mana regenerates quickly for RL hours on end? Pretty damn unrealistic. These sorts of things shouldn't happen, and in my experience, are punished when they do.

That's as far as I think it needs to go.

If roleplay was given more "authority" over code, I'd leave Armageddon and never look back. I'm not saying that as some sort of threat, because I'm certain my absence wouldn't be noticed, but because I want to illustrate that some of us are pretty good roleplayers, focus on the roleplay, and also enjoy skill-building and code arbitration. The code is the DM in this big Dungeons & Dragons game--we need that impartial arbiter to make sure we don't devolve into emoted combat where one side has to admit defeat based on an honor system.

My opinions of where it goes too far, using an earlier post to illustrate my points:

- 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.

Okay. I think this is a pretty all right idea, but it'd need some really careful implementation and might be more work than it's worth.

- 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.

I could live with this, but it, again, would require extremely careful implementation to not leave people who play often feeling like their dedication to the game isn't going to get them anywhere. I think we're better off requiring coded practice of skills, honestly.

- 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.

Now we've reached the point of something that is utterly terrifying to me. In my opinion, in a game with coded combat and coded opponents, this should never, ever happen. My ideal solution would be to bring on a couple of Storytellers who don't work on clans or even approve applications, but whose entire job is to listen to wishes about clans going out on patrols and animate things to make it interesting every once in a while. That's it, that's all they'd do. This, to me, seems like a much, much better solution than virtual emoted scenarios being rewarded with skill increases.

I like our current balance. I don't think I'm alone. And, look, I don't play endlessly. I don't even play all that much. If my characters are fairly weak as a result, so be it. I'll deal with it. I see karma as a good roleplay reward, and I don't think skill bonuses need to be meted out as another one, or anything along those lines.

Now, I would like to see coded changes making it harder to apartment-kill someone, or anything along those lines, but this isn't giving roleplay authority over code--it's just making the code more realistic. I'm 100% in favor of increasing the realism of the code.

[Thunkkin]

I thought it was pretty self evident how both sides "win" as a result of focusing on roleplay as opposed to code. At least, it was to me.

The opposition between code and roleplay, which you seem to be assuming here, is not self evident.

[Ampere]

[Eloran]

The opposition between code and roleplay, which you seem to be assuming here, is not self evident.

You assuming that I am assuming anything is self evident. Because you said it. And I quoted it.

But I am not assuming anything. You are.

Assumer.

On topic: Code augments my roleplay - it governs it and facilitates it. Code can foster roleplay, but it does not come before my character.

[LoD]

I thought it was pretty self evident how both sides "win" as a result of focusing on roleplay as opposed to code. At least, it was to me.

You seem to think that RP and code are mutually exclusive by stating that one's focus must be split between the two and proposing that more focus on "RP" will improve everyone's experience.  However, I've always believed that the code is simply one of the tools in your chest that allow you to flesh out your character and further represent an integral part of Armageddon's balance between no code and hard code.

I can RP without anyone else in the room based strictly on hard coded commands, because my character's choices and actions are constantly defining his role.  My character is not defined through my interactions with others alone, but with every action he/she takes -- and that certainly includes use of the hard code.

Here's a scene where there's nothing but a character, the hard code, and his choices.

Code Select Expand

Sandy Desert [NEWS]
A large obsidian deposit is here, half buried in the sand.

Looking over his shoulder, the burly, large-nosed man has arrived from the west.

Appearing nervous, the burly, large-nosed man wields a glass hacker.

The burly, large-nosed man takes a few steps toward a large obsidian deposit, taking care to face toward the northeast as he squints toward the horizon and folds his hands about a glass hacker.

The burly, large-nosed man swings a glass hacker at a large obsidian deposit.

Tiny chips of dark obsidian fall to the sand as the burly, large-nosed man's glass hacker strikes the surface of the deposit.

The burly, large-nosed man swings a glass hacker at a large obsidian deposit.

Muttering to himself and gazing to the northeast again, the burly, large-nosed man says, in sirihish:
    "...fekkers better not try anythin' this time..."

Returning to his work, the burly, large-nosed man readies a glass hacker and brings it down sharply upon the deposit.

The burly, large-nosed man swings a glass hacker at a large obsidian deposit.
A small chunk of obsidian falls away.

Reaching down toward the small piece of obsidian, the burly, large-nosed man suddenly crouches down and presses his back flat against the deposit.

Breathing raggedly, his features layered in sweat, the burly, large-nosed man says, in sirihish:
   "...fek...fek...fek...why did they have ta come this way..."

Easing up from his crouched position, the burly, large-nosed man peers over the edge of the deposit with a nervous squint, his dark tongue probing the ridges of his cracked lips.

Thrusting himself up suddenly and readying a glass hacker, the burly, large-nosed man says, in sirihish:
   "A'right -- time ta knock dis out an' get the krath back inta town."

The burly, large-nosed man swings a glass hacker at a large obsidian deposit.

The burly, large-nosed man swings a glass hacker at a large obsidian deposit.

Grimacing, the burly, large-nosed man slams his glass hacker against the deposit quickly, his cheeks quivering slightly with the sharp impact of his tool to the stone.

The burly, large-nosed man swings a glass hacker at a large obsidian deposit.
A large chunk of obsidian falls away.

Breathing a quick sigh of relief, the burly, large-nosed man says, in sirihish:
   "Krath smile on me, that'll keep ole' Jak off mah back fer at least a week."

The burly, large-nosed man picks up a small chunk of obsidian.
The burly, large-nosed man picks up a large chunk of obsidian.

Casting one last glance toward the northeast, the burly, large-nosed man walks east.

Does the fact that code has a place in this scene exclude it from being RP?  If there's no one there to witness the event, does it mean that it counts less or that he does a worse job portraying his character?  No, I don't think any of those things are true.  The code is simply helping him complete and flesh out the scene in a way that he couldn't have accomplished without it.

What I think you mean to say is that we would all "win" through changes that place a heavier focus on "interaction" -- and I wouldn't disagree.  If there are choices to be made, and one option places a heavier focus on interaction with other players than the others, then you could make a good argument as to why that's the superior choice, but it's important not to place code and RP into an arena and expect one to rise up victorious.

Code and RP are oftentimes the same thing with varying degrees of poetry, exposition, and flexibility.  Our search should be for ways to improve systems so that the largest number of people can benefit from the resulting opportunities for participation and interaction.

-LoD

[Eloran]

You seem to think that RP and code are mutually exclusive by stating that one's focus must be split between the two and proposing that more focus on "RP" will improve everyone's experience.

You seem to be one of those assuming types. Assumer.

However, I've always believed that the code is simply one of the tools in your chest that allow you to flesh out your character and further represent an integral part of Armageddon's balance between no code and hard code.

ZOMG, isn't that what I just said in my last post?  

Let me pull up my post for you:

Code augments my roleplay - it governs it and facilitates it. Code can foster roleplay, but it does not come before my character.

[LoD]

Code augments my roleplay - it governs it and facilitates it. Code can fosters roleplay, but it does not come before my character.

How do you see code coming before your character?  You use the words augment, govern, and facilitate in your description of the code's relationship with your RP, but I'm contesting that the code is your RP just as much as your emotes and dialogue are your RP.  All of those components are direct expressions of your character's decision-making process that defines them and their "role" within the game.

> say (anger rising in his tone) I'll not suffer another moment of your presence!
> pemote knuckles whiten as they grasp the pommel of ~sword, his features constricting in rage as he charges toward ~aqualine.
> kill aqualine

All of these decisions/actions are being combined to portray your role and contribute to your role-play.  And if code is a component of your roleplay, then how can it be possible to focus on it over the code?  That's like saying everybody wins if we focus more on Sprite as opposed to lemon-lime flavor.  It doesn't make any sense.

-LoD

[Eloran]

How do you see code coming before your character?

Ebonically speaking, it don't.

You use the words augment, govern, and facilitate in your description of the code's relationship with your RP, but I'm contesting that the code is your RP just as much as your emotes and dialogue are your RP.

Ya I got that. I disagree. Code =/= roleplay. Code is a tool that helps govern. It is not roleplay in and of itself.

And if code is a component of your roleplay, then how can it be possible to focus on it over the code?  That's like saying everybody wins if we focus more on Sprite as opposed to lemon-lime flavor.  It doesn't make any sense.

Y'see, thar you go with them damned assumptions 'gain, dag-nabbit.

Concepts, sir.

To me, roleplay is just a tad more important than code. You can roleplay without code.

Code is the brain.
Roleplay is the heart.

em nods firmly

[Jingo]

I think we need to define roleplay.

I think it's one of those generalities that everyone has a different conception of.

We start roleplaying the moment we log into the mud.The way I see it, I can play a role without intereracting with the code. Just not a very good one. NPC's do it fine, vnpcs are even playing a role.

The problem is that sometimes we play a role that does not mesh with the gameworld.

So I think instead we should differentiate between what is poor roleplay/ good roleplay and how each interacts with the code. Rather than drumming up the old cliche about emoting/code not being roleplay.

[ibusoe]

RPI MUSH  ------- <level of authority held by code> ------- HACK and SLASH
                                        <-- ^ -->

I don't ever want to find Armageddon at either end of this spectrum, yet some people seem to expect that a sea of individuals comprised of varied ages, varied RP backgrounds, varied tastes, varied hours to play, varied access to play, and varied opinions on game philosophy will eventually agree on where the " ^ " should be positioned for the optimal RP experience.

The simple answer is that will never happen.  Armageddon has been, and always will be, in a state of flux between these two extremes based on what the current team of Staff members decides to implement, experiment with, or try -- partially based on whim, partially based on internal discussion, and partially based on player discussion.

I find many of the suggestions for increasing RP potential by lessening the authority held by code to be "pie-in-the-sky" illusions that don't bring solutions, only different problems.  It's easy to espouse the benefits and superiority of a theoretical system, but I'm not convinced that the proposed line of thinking will provide us with any more enjoyable of an environment when considering the "whole" of the player base.

Off peak players, fluctuating distribution of player resources, the relative size of the game world, the historical blend of code and RP, and many other factors directly contribute to the sustained balance between code-generated results and player-generated results.  Many of the suggestions seem to be aimed at increasing an individual enjoyment based on an individual belief of what Armageddon should be rather than taking what everyone enjoys and trying to find a compromise.

Personally, I find the hard-coded aspects of the game a refreshing and necessary part of the experience, allowing me to follow a variety of paths and options when pursuing my character's and my personal goals.  I enjoy exploring and experimenting with the code, and feel rewarded when I make discoveries, achieve milestones, or have coded success.  Likewise, I enjoy interacting and playing with other people, and feel rewarded when I contribute to a good scene, am able to persuade someone based purely on my own RP, or have success with something that cannot be achieved through code alone.  There have been times when my success has hinged upon purely coded support, and other times when it's hinged upon purely RP support.  It's the compromise of the two, and the allowances that come with that compromise, that have always provided me with the greatest level of enjoyment over the years.

I, for one, hope that balance always stays.

-LoD

No apologies should be necessary, my good man.  When I conceived of this poll, the best case scenario that I could conceive of was that someone would express something like this, but maybe half as awesome.

That post turned the awesome up to 11.

[brytta.leofa]

I like code.  I like combat.  I like improving skills.  I even like that I can log into Armageddon, create a generic Amos, and go exploring without directly interacting with a soul, though I get bored with that more sooner than later.

As someone has said, the idea of people heading out into the desert, emoting through a Random Encounter, and having that count as coded training is horrifying to me.  When we move that far away from code and into the realm of individuals Making Stuff Up, we (a) deny other players the opportunity to influence us in ways we haven't agreed to or anticipated, and (b) will get a ton of sad, self-indulgent play.

But here is a point with which I most strenuously agree:

More seriously, I agree that certain staff policies encourage a heavy handed, coded response. Every time there's a ruling against a res for a pc who drank cleaning fluid or starved while link dead, it reminds people that code is what matters.

If I can kill my opponent through twinking and exploits, I may get a slap on the wrist, but their pc will still be dead.  The lesson is obvious.

There are a some cases--a few--in which the code does or allows the wrong thing.  Drinking cleaning fluid is, I daresay, one; why are those items still even in the game?  Why do we let people die from a gulp of raw sewage--as though they wouldn't smell it before they took a sip?  Why does every half-giant soldier in sight draw edged weapons and instagib someone EVERY SINGLE TIME that Private Malik types "hit man"?

Because the code will never represent reality perfectly, I think we need to administratively have a little more respect in such cases for the huge quantities of time, effort, and emotion that we expend on our characters.  If the code does something that defies all logic, and the code can't be outright fixed, the default staff action should be to undo what the code did wrong.

I'm speaking a little dogmatically here, and I realize that staffage requires a balancing act between facilitating play, avoiding favoritism or the appearance of it, and maintaining policies that will not suck up all the staff's time just, say, weighing crime-code resurrections.  But I think there are a handful of code issues that are regularly harmful to the game, and my uninformed feeling is that staff ought to be a bit more open to doing manual overrides if the underlying problem can't be fixed.

[staggerlee]

I like code.  I like combat.  I like improving skills.  I even like that I can log into Armageddon, create a generic Amos, and go exploring without directly interacting with a soul, though I get bored with that more sooner than later.

As someone has said, the idea of people heading out into the desert, emoting through a Random Encounter, and having that count as coded training is horrifying to me.  When we move that far away from code and into the realm of individuals Making Stuff Up, we (a) deny other players the opportunity to influence us in ways we haven't agreed to or anticipated, and (b) will get a ton of sad, self-indulgent play.

But here is a point with which I most strenuously agree:

More seriously, I agree that certain staff policies encourage a heavy handed, coded response. Every time there's a ruling against a res for a pc who drank cleaning fluid or starved while link dead, it reminds people that code is what matters.

If I can kill my opponent through twinking and exploits, I may get a slap on the wrist, but their pc will still be dead.  The lesson is obvious.

There are a some cases--a few--in which the code does or allows the wrong thing.  Drinking cleaning fluid is, I daresay, one; why are those items still even in the game?  Why do we let people die from a gulp of raw sewage--as though they wouldn't smell it before they took a sip?  Why does every half-giant soldier in sight draw edged weapons and instagib someone EVERY SINGLE TIME that Private Malik types "hit man"?

Because the code will never represent reality perfectly, I think we need to administratively have a little more respect in such cases for the huge quantities of time, effort, and emotion that we expend on our characters.  If the code does something that defies all logic, and the code can't be outright fixed, the default staff action should be to undo what the code did wrong.

I'm speaking a little dogmatically here, and I realize that staffage requires a balancing act between facilitating play, avoiding favoritism or the appearance of it, and maintaining policies that will not suck up all the staff's time just, say, weighing crime-code resurrections.  But I think there are a handful of code issues that are regularly harmful to the game, and my uninformed feeling is that staff ought to be a bit more open to doing manual overrides if the underlying problem can't be fixed.

This is exactly where I'm coming from.
To clarify, (again) I'm not calling for less code, but I do think that we need to consider the limitations of code. Code is stupid, or blind, if you prefer. It can't tell the difference between a pickpocket stealing from a templar, and a filthy, rag clad rinthi surreptitiously placing a bread crumb in another filthy rinther's pocket with a "plant" skill. Both bring down immediatte and horrific judgement.  Sure you can think of clever ways to avoid the more common problems, but it's always going to be an uphill battle.

As such... I'd rather admit the failings of the system and concentrate on code that allows tools to player. Tools for interaction, for mediating conflict, for causing conflict, and for bringing your own story, and the world around you, to life.  I believe that the players, with those tools in hand, then need to be held accountable by the game's staff, and when possible, each other.

Trying to build a perfect, self sustaining sim-world is an admirable project, but it's inevitably going to lead to the problems underlined in Brytta's post. From a design perspective, I think that it's important to realize those limitations, and the impossibility of ever plugging all the holes.  Instead focus on cooperation, story, conflict, and at the end of the day... roleplaying.

For clarification: When I say roleplaying, I mean the intentional or subconscious  process through which a player uses the tools provided by code to depict a character's unique and individual personality, story and role in the world.

Or if you prefer:

–verb (used with object)
1.to assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of (another), esp. in a make-believe situation in an effort to understand a differing point of view or social interaction: Management trainees were given a chance to role-play labor negotiators.  

[staggerlee]

I'm going to provide a few positive examples, because picking on the failings of the game fosters a really profoundly negative environment and isn't doing much for the discussion here:


Example #1

The kudos tool.

It allows players to provide feedback to each other, while maintaining the  curtain of anonymity. After a particularly brutal torture scene or death players can ensure that the victim knows it was an ic dispute, and not ooc. Things players think to be positive can be encouraged.  It fosters ooc understanding, and encourages good habits in game. It does this in a transparent, monitored way so as to avoid the potential pitfalls of ooc communication.

It does nothing to advantage any character in the game, but enormously helps players.

Example #2

Combat Code/Various Gambling and Gaming Code.

Both allow two parties to engage in a head to head conflict. The code not only determines the victor, but also adds an element of chance and uncertainty. The game couldn't function without this kind of code. It's code to mediate conflicts.

Example #3

The Way and centralized meeting points in game, such as the Gaj.

Both the building choice of having central bars, and the inclusion of code for the Way allow players to coordinate and meet up in game, and encourage interaction without forcing people to run around the streets hoping to bump into another pc.  This is very, very good.  Otherwise it would be like living in New York and knowing six people, none of whom had phones or permanent residences. Yow. Very important.

[Krath]

My thoughts, and I have only read the first three pages
of this thread.

Play how you want to play and only worry about
-your- play.  If you are not playing within the
guidelines of the game rules the IMMs will deal with
you.

[flurry]

I like staggerlee's list, and I would add the following to it.

• The emote code. I think this is one of the real points of pride for this game. So flexible, and only getting better. Especially command emotes, for allowing us to paint an image while using otherwise plain commands.
• Biography
• Original submissions
• Cultural documentation
• Rumor boards

[flurry]

Looking at the original post, I can't say I agree with the community being too hard on twinking. Yeah, collectively we all can be pretty judgmental (something I noticed about the GDB early on), but on the whole I don't find the game policies to be strict at all, compared to what I've seen in other games.

I'm not sure if there are any aspects of the game that are diminished due to concern over twinking. I can't think of any.

Like others have said, I think sometimes the code rewards the wrong kind of behavior. Or, rewards it too much. In other words, unrealistic behavior, even extremely unrealistic behavior, is often the very thing that the code tends to encourage.

[Agent_137]

i just like reading the title of this thread.

[ibusoe]

i just like reading the title of this thread.

Thank you I put more effort into the title than I usually do, but it's not the best ever.  Current champion goes to a sports writer who actually published an article in mainstream press entitled:

"The Kentucky Derby is degenerate and depraved."

[DustMight]

The only example I want to set, is that if you twink, I'm going to report you and try my best to ignore your existence in the game world.

Seconded.

[Eloran]

ibusoe: You're not getting it.

Look closely at the title.

[NoteworthyFellow]

ibusoe: You're not getting it.

Look closely at the title.

No, I think we're not getting it. Clearly, this thread was intended to be a celebration of cumin, that most marvelous of spices.

[Lizzie]

Except she spelled cumin with too many Ms.

[Eloran]

I thought it was short for "cum in it y'all!"