Leadership skill

[Swordsman]

I had this idea the other night ... haven't thought too much about it yet, but I'll post it here for discussion anyway ...

The idea is to code a leadership skill that'll reflect the military skill of a leader PC in small but maybe important ways. Basically, if you have an experienced leader at the head of a group then that group will probably be more organised than a group led by a twit. So, things like "rescue" and "flee" might have a better chance of succeeding because of the better organisation/leadership. Another idea might be to reduce lag slightly on these types of commands, but I guess that'd be a lot harder to code. One way it could work is that in combat, when someone tries to "rescue" or "flee" or whatever, the code checks to see if that PC is following someone. If he/she is, then the code checks that someone's "leadership skill" and works out some bonus from there. It wouldn't check for anyone leading the leader otherwise it'd slow the code right down.

Like I said, I haven't given this much thought but I think it's an interesting idea and possibly would encourage people to become or to seek out experienced leaders to follow (and good leaders would become more valuable to clans). My main idea is to make it easier for groups with an experienced leader to survive a fight, and generally be better organised (I think "guard" should get a boost, too ... an experienced leader would have a better idea of how to arrange people to guard a noble most effectively). Anyway, up for discussion ...

Swordsman

[Kankman]

You aren't.. Serious? Are you?


If you are, I must apologize for the harsh response. You probably won't forgive me though, because my appology skill is only at 5%.


Luckily my sarcasm skill is nearly maxxed.

l33t

[Dakkon Black]

Well despite Kanks well though out response I think its a kinda neat Idea. However that bieng said.... I dont think It'll work.

Not to say it wouldnt be cool

.....

[Eclipse]

I like it myself though the coding might be very difficult and each leader should have their own bonuses that reflect their leadership style.

[Krath]

Im gonna have to agree with Kankman on this one. Why should there be a leadership skill. Leadership is how YOU lead people, now what % a skill is at. If you are an organized and good leader your group should be fine. Why denote how great of a leader you are by s skill.

As to "groupies" getting perks from it. What is the point. Regardless if you are a leader or not how well you run from combat or rescue someone is based on how well you trained somebody in the art of disengaging from combat or knocking someone out of the way of attack.

It is late my thoughts probably dont make sense by those are My two sids.

Krath

Keep the ideas rolling though.

[John]

I'm going to have to agree with Kankman and Krath on this. I just don't see it being that, I think the ways a leader would help people in fleeing would be to have a safe landmark to run too, not to increase their percentage.

Just my 2 'sid *plink plink*

[creeper386]

I'm going to have to say no on the skill idea thing.

But this does bring up a good idea in my head. It is this... Some more experienced players and Imms get together... And make up some documents of good OOC leaders. In the least. Things that help build qualities to both be good OOC leaders... And to be able to play leader characters. It's one of the worst problems, I've had characters in a semi leadership role and felt really uncomfortable because I don't know what to do. Although some of it could be handled IC by my character learning how to be a leader... Some of it could be helpful of OOC qualities to have, build/grown and all that jazz... If you understood all that... Tony'll say he'll get you a pizza.


Creeper

[John]

Some more experienced players and Imms get together... And make up some documents of good OOC leaders.

Someone (can't remember his name) posted a VERY good post on this very topic and said he was going to send it in. He didn't. Does anyone know the post I'm talking about? (I think he once played a famous dwarf).

I agree, I hate not knowing how to be a good OOC leader

[Delirium]

Leading a clan is rough work.

Established or brand new, it requires hours of time both online and offline making sure that everyone is taken care of, including the Imms. You have to be available for your players, provide and update documentation, keep plots moving, people entertained and all this while trying to have a good time.

I have been involved in a quite a few clans in my time and, contrary to AC's comments regarding an inabiliy to shape the world via pre-established clan characters, it is possible to make an impact upon the world with EITHER route.

The key to being a successful clan leader is forming a realistic and workable plan, setting it into motion and following through no matter how long it may take and how many obstacles are thrown in your way. The Imms aren't just going to read your email on 'Clan ChewyChomp's Desert Fortress of Power' and get to work creating it after you log and mail in a few hours of RP.

The Imms want the rewards to come as a result of hard work and a few risks along the way. They'll throw in a few bumps to see how well you handle the problems and give you a chance to make a good story. Some players see these blocks as "getting screwed" simply because they were hoping they'd rise to the height of power within a House/Clan simply by sitting in taverns for years on end - which does happen.

As a pro-active player, however, I have made several attempts to change and alter the world with my clans and the clans of the game.

Ironswords. The Ironswords are a documented dwarven clan that beseiged the city-state of Allanak for a game YEAR after freeing the southern slaves of the obsidian mines. Led by Thrain Ironsword, yours truly. It didn't just happen though. I didn't wake up and decide to do it.

Wish all Hey, going to attack Allanak tonight - load up about 100 dwarven NPC's if you could, thanks. I'll let you know when to attack.

That's not how it works. I built contacts, worked out relationships with clans, built my army and trained them. Worked hard to develop my character and my concept - gained support politically and physically. Then, when everything came to a head - we attacked.

It doesn't always work. Your PC can die smack dab in the middle and it all fizzles and dies.

I have also had success bringing life to a pre-existing clan, House Salarr, which (at the time) had a non-existant playerbase. I started a PC when he was 17 years old (Khann D'arden) and joined Salarr as a beginning merchant.

He ended up retiring at 55, head of almost all operations and probably being one of the largest world-players there's been because of it. Estates were built, plots were set in motion, clans were made to support the play a simple plan put into motion. It just takes dedication and hard work.

To give another, more recent, example - there has been an addition in the game (as noted in the Updates) that a northern branch of the T'zai-Byn has opened. This didn't simply come about because the Imms figured it was 'about time' or that it was a good idea.

Taking a leadership role, I made a plan that I thought made IC sense, was realistic and would be a fair challenge. Over the course of about 10 RL months, I made contacts, RP'd, handled political and physical challenges and finally, through many hours, days and months of hard work and planning, saw my goal achieved.

Would there have been a northern compound if I hadn't pushed forward with the idea and tried my best to make it happen, possibly. But this is exactly the 'kind' of result you can achieve in a pre-existing clan to make your mark and be remembered when all is said and done.

There is room to stretch in both categories, new and old. You can make your mark on the MUD in both catgeories and it follows the same path. Hard work, planning, goal setting and a little bit of luck.

More than my two cents, but hey - I've got a whole pocket full of change.

-LoD

[Delirium]

I'll say it again, leading is rough work.

I figured some PC leaders (and their followers) could use some insight into just what goes on in the role of a leader. Now I am simply speaking from experience and certainly not implying that my way is the 'right way' or the 'best way' by any means, but it has worked for me.

It starts when you log on, every day.

From the moment you log on, You feel a foreign presence contact your mind. Someone always needs something: a few moments of your time, a decision about a job, a question about House policies, informing you one of your men is in jail, wanting to quit the House, wanting to get paid, asking to join up with the House.

And that's in the first 10 minutes. If you collect all of these requests and add them together, you've just committed yourself (if you're lucky) to about 30 mins - 1 hour of simply handling other people's tasks. This goes on all day long, so be ready for it. There's no way around it, that is your job as the leader of the clan - a slave to your people.

I know that many people think that all you do is sit around in taverns, yucking it up with clients or nobles or smoking spice in a back den somewhere, but it's all part and partial to the leading gig. People have no idea how much work it involves micro-managing a clan of players whom all want to have fun and need -you- to provide it for them. While most leaders don't mind, the general populace should be aware at how time consuming dealing with it can be.

Keeping your followers active.

One of the main things you must do to have a happy clan is keep them active. Now, this doesn't mean you have to have an RPT every single day and create large-scale plots and events. It just means that your people need to have a sense of direction and purpose. They can only stand guard at a gate or by your side for so many hours without losing their minds and wondering what the hell they are doing when their friends are telling them on ICQ how they just escaped a horde of gith and found a cool ass cave in the desert.

Keep your men busy. Use anything that you can to give them purpose and even make up small jobs that really don't mean anything. If there are 3-5 of them around, have them go outside and do something, anything. They don't need to know why it's important, you're the boss. Tell them that we need five gith skulls. That ought to keep them busy. Have them run to Red Storm and pick up a few jugs of spiced ale for a future meeting or to head north to Luir's to see what's going on of late and continue developing relations with their people.

It does seem like a lot, but it's why players play the game. They want to build a story and have a good time. Help them reach that goal. They may die, yes, but if you are a high-level leader in your clan, I highly doubt that you're going anywhere soon and fresh meat pop up all the time in their stock leggings, pack and torch waiting for work.

Reward your followers with praise and coin.

If you want to be a clan leader for long, you'd better learn how to keep players happy. That is one of the single most important things about being a leader - knowing what players want and giving them enough to stay with you.

The best system I came up with is to reward them whenever you see them and they complete a task, in addition to a monthly wage. You may have the set the wage low if you have a lot of employees, but the fact that they will receive money in their pocket that DAY instead of waiting for some kind of monthly salary will have them logging in much more frequently for a chance at some coin.

If your guards are with you when you travel somewhere to make a little 'sid with some sales, gives them a small cut. Buy them some drinks when you're in the tavern. Allow them some time to look for 'cool eq' when you're riding through a village or town they rarely get to see. Reward them when they do things well and, in return, they will begin to look for ways to serve you instead of waiting for you to tell them.

Provide them with a good set of policies and rules that empower them to do more than spar, spar, spar all day long. Give them a schedule of things to do and guidelines with which to do them so that you're both comfortable they won't run willy nilly into the sands to their death. If you don't set up these guidelines, people WILL die. They'll do it even if you DO set up good policies - I used to call it Kohmar disease when I played Khann.

I'd JUST finish buying armor, weapons, food, water and clothing for my new hire. Went over the rules and everything and the first thing they do when I'm not around is walk straight out the damn gate and die to krath-knows-what out in the desert. Wasted MY time and MY money. That happens over and over and over and over to -any- employer. Those of you whom are employees wanting to know why you may be paid so slowly - these are exactly the type of bad apples that make we leaders wary of handing out much at all.

The burden, and responsibility, of command.

You are responsible for EVERYTHING. If a player isn't have fun. Your fault. If an Imm hasn't made that special order yet, your fault. If your employee decided that it'd be fun to storm into the Trader's Inn and slaughter the single most powerful noble lord in all of the city because they were bored and thought it be 'k00l' - guess what? It's all your fault and you may be executed or punished because of the actions of another player you had NO CONTROL OVER.

This can be the single most frustrating thing about being a leader is the dreaded contact from a noble, templar or other such authority figure demanding you come speak with them about the actions of one of your employees. I know that ICly they want to bring the matter to your attention and ask why it has occurred. Someone's head has to roll. It should NOT be that of the employer, however, as they have about as much control over the players and their ultimate decisions as you have over what shirt they're wearing in RL.

In addition to this, you are responsible when people don't get paid because they log in at odd times or infrequently. You are responsible when they aren't having as much fun as they thought they would or when they get bored or when they can't figure out for themselves how to have a good time. You are always responsible and it hangs like a weight over your head to provide these things to people in your clan.

Setting goals and planning.

So, you've recruited a group of people. They train themselves and a few of them have actually managed to stay alive for more than 2 RL weeks and you want to actually use them now. As a leader, you need to take a look at your position and see what you want, and can, accomplish. Take a large long-term goal and chop it up into little sections, then set your men and yourself in motion on a timeline you'd like to see. Email the Imm Staff on your project and what you plan to do so they can jump in and help/hinder you along the way as they see fit within the confines of the game world.

Examples.

Goal: Free the dwarven slaves of the southern obsidian mines.

Step 1: Gather dwarves loyal to my cause. Train them. (ongoing)
Step 2: Establish a place of operations from which to train.
Step 3: Gather money to place bribes, hire men and get information.
Step 4: Case the mines, the guard rotations, the distance from the city.
Step 5: Meet with different nomadic tribes, asking for help.
Step 6: Meet with members of the target's enemies, asking for help.
Step 7: Meet with friends and neighbors, asking for help.
Step 8: Form a plan of attack that won't be reported to the enemy.
Step 9: Meet and gather the support of other dwarven tribes.
Step 10: Formalize the plan of attack and gather your forces.
Step 11: Set a date for the RPT, inform the Imm Staff.
Step 12: Let the RPT take its course.

Now, some of these steps may only take a few minutes while others will take RL months to handle properly. This will create a LOT of RP and direction toward a clan and its followers that gives it a drive and a reason for being. The men know the cause, they know what to do, they know why and the leader gives them the tasks they need to accomplish. You must also stay on top of everything and keep driven. Most importantly you must not DIE because if you do - almost all of your goals and planning fall apart as your employees die and leave the organization.

I could write all day about the trials and tribulations involved with being a clan leader, but I doubt anyone would want to spend the time.

Being a leader is DAMN hard work. You need to be online, attentive, diplomatic, considerate, understanding, firm, harsh, deceptive, manipulative, cunning, quick and fair all at the same time. It's not a job that anyone can do. Anything worthwhile takes time, so just put one foot in front of the other and keep things moving.

-LoD

A link to the actual thread: http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1745&start=0

[John]

That's it! Could that get put into a doc (with LoD's permission of course)?

[Dakkon Black]

It should be put in archives, fantastic doc... now I just need to find someone dumb enough to follow me.  :?

[Rindan]

There is absolutely no need to give a good leader extra perks in terms of skills.  Simply put a good leader is its own reward.  The difference between a well trained group following a good leader and a rabble following a bad leader is night and day.  Any leader with half his salt is keep track of any battle he is in with his men and shouting out orders.  Even more importantly, a good leader has already trained his men well enough so that he doesn't need to shout out order, and this is all just good leadership in combat.  Even more importantly is how a leader handles himself outside of combat.  

Leaders are NOT an undervalued commodity.  Any big honcho in the game worth half his karma knows that having strong leaders is one of the most important parts of an organization.  These people will fight tooth and nail to get the good leaders to work for them.  Recruits are a dime a dozen.  Leaders who can make recruits stick around and become something are rare.  Anyone who proves themselves as a leader does not need to worry about being underappreciated unless their higher up is a complete and utter moron.

The idea is to code a leadership skill that'll reflect the military skill of a leader PC in small but maybe important ways. Basically, if you have an experienced leader at the head of a group then that group will probably be more organised than a group led by a twit. So, things like "rescue" and "flee" might have a better chance of succeeding because of the better organisation/leadership. Another idea might be to reduce lag slightly on these types of commands, but I guess that'd be a lot harder to code. One way it could work is that in combat, when someone tries to "rescue" or "flee" or whatever, the code checks to see if that PC is following someone. If he/she is, then the code checks that someone's "leadership skill" and works out some bonus from there. It wouldn't check for anyone leading the leader otherwise it'd slow the code right down.

Without a leadership skill, a good leader could perhaps give lessons, run drills, lecture, etc on the concepts of 'rescuing' and 'fleeing' and supplement these with a hard-coded 'teach' thing. This would give these skills a better chance of succeeding... all because of the good leader. There is really no need for a skill, at least in my opinion, because things can be done through other means. And who would get this 'leadership' skill? Everyone of a certain subguild or something? Anyways...

[Swordsman]

First, I don't take any offence at any ridicule. I've had people treat me much worse OOCly (related to Arm) before, so no biggie. Yes, I was serious about the idea. No, I haven't really given it a lot of thought (as I said). Some of the things I hadn't thought about were how a skill like that would improve, and also which guilds might get it (like other people raised). Good points.

What got me thinking of this idea was remembering times when I as a leader lost people IC due to lag or other things that weren't anyone's OOC fault (like making a stupid decision, or not paying attention to the battle). Now, this isn't what my idea is exactly supposed to counter, but it's what got me thinking about this idea in the first place.

AFAIK, when many people attack one person ICly, there's a coded advantage to the big group. Makes perfect logical sense. But going the other way around, there's no defensive advantage (AFAIK) to being in a big group. Good example: a lone gith (or whatever) walks up to a big group of PCs and attacks. Now, IMO it should be relatively easy for the defender to be rescued by a comrade, simply because he/she has a lot of them and it's just one gith attacking (assuming it's not SuperGith, etc., etc.). See what I mean? (The same situation could apply to six guard PCs guarding a noble PC and someone attacks the noble.) And the idea that came from that is that if there's a solid leader in charge, there could be some coded advantage to reflect that. If I wanted to be twinkish or silly, I'd suggest giving boosts to kick and other offensive skills, but as I said, the idea is to reflect better group coordination for safety.

Obviously, this idea is to supplement good IC/OOC actual leadership as shown by a player, not to be some scale for saying how good a leader is or for it to be the main thing you worry about as a leader. Anyone who thinks I was suggesting the idea because it would be cool or would be something for a leader player to brag about is badly mistaken. Definitely, as Rindan basically said, IC training and OOC training of players (through them taking on board what their characters are learning ICly, so they know which commands to use, when to use them, etc.) should be the main way to reflect good IC group coordination. I actually thought that point was so obvious that it didn't need mentioning, but maybe I was wrong on that. As I've hopefully made clearer, my idea is to supplement this with a bit of coded advantage, like the advantage for many people attacking one.

Sure, any code idea could be used to twink out, but that wasn't what I had in mind. To me, my idea makes fairly good sense (otherwise I wouldn't waste anyone's time by posting it), though obviously it's half-baked at this stage. Good, useful feedback so far.

Swordsman

[John]

there's no defensive advantage (AFAIK) to being in a big group. Good example: a lone gith (or whatever) walks up to a big group of PCs and attacks. Now, IMO it should be relatively easy for the defender to be rescued by a comrade, simply because he/she has a lot of them and it's just one gith attacking

aaaaah! Now a code implementation that supported that I think would get more support

I don't think this should be so much a "leader" skill but a "group" skill. The difference would be that it would matter on everyone's individual "group" skill as to how well it worked (in attacking and defending). It would probably work something like other muds have (e.g. merentha). The "leader" offer for people to be in the "group" and people accept or decline. Now you could make it so this is just a command or an actual skill.

[Delirium]

If there's six people guarding a noble and someone manages to get through to the noble, he's got some pretty piss-poor guards.  :wink:

I know, I know. Just being difficult.

[Rindan]

I still don't see the use of giving another coded advantage to groups.  Already, you get a massive coded bonus to having numbers on your side.  A lone highly skilled warrior can be taken down by a group of complete newbies.  One on one the newbies would have no chance to even score a hit, but together the code gives them massive attack bonuses so that they are more then a match.  In a more concert example, I had a warrior that could kill a gortok in a round or two and never had any fear of being hit.  He once got jumped by six of the little bastards and he barely made it away with his life.  He was half way to dead in seconds.  The coded advantages to being a group are already so extreme I would be very weary of seeing them get any more extreme.

The same goes for defensive situations.  Simply put, if you have group of guys, and ICly and OOCly they work well together, they will easily be able to rescue each other and spread around the damage.  If five people all try and rescue the same guy, someone is going to succeed.   The bonus is already built in.  You can get the command to go off 6 times in one round.  The same applies to guarding things.  If a noble has 5 guards sitting around him, and they are all using the guard command, anyone who tries to get to him has to pass five checks against guards.  Further, even if he does get through, he is going to have five people attacking and be incurring a massive defensive penalty such that your average assassin would be shredded in seconds.

The example you give of the gith is a prime example of when IC and OOC training are key factors and why a well oiled group will always win.  If you have someone in the group who is weak, then he should have someone who is stronger guarding him.  Ordering the stronger ones to guard the weaker ones is just good IC (and OOC) leadership.  There is no need to have a group bonus to rescue to pull a weak persons ass out of the fire if the weaker members already have stronger members guarding them.  Having everyone guard the sergeant might make you all feel warm and fuzzy, but don't be surprised when the complete newbie of the group is killed in a few seconds because you were all riding a circle around the guy who needed the least protection.

The bonuses for good leadership and having numbers on your side are already built in.  I would much rather prefer to see it kept that way.  If someone is RPing a piss poor leader, I don't think his 'leadership' or 'group' skill should be slowly climbing just because he is breathing and has to fight around other people.  If the Byn want to attack in a rabble, then the code should not dictate otherwise.  Fighting in a smooth and well oiled group is something to be RPed and not something I want to see as another number on my skills list.

[Swordsman]

Rindan: I agree that IC/OOC actual leadership by a player(s) should be the main factor in group coordination. But I disagree about any coded bonus already being built in just through more people trying to rescue (or guard, etc.). When lots of people attack one defender, it's pretty obvious there's a cumulative effect. It's not the same as lots of people attacking one defender just one at a time. The last few people attacking can hit much better than they normally could. But when lots of people try to rescue one defender (for example), there doesn't seem to be any cumulative effect. The last few people rescuing don't seem any better at succeeding than they normally would. Now, whether something like this makes sense or not, or should go into the game or not, is down to personal opinion. But there's no coded defensive benefit as far as I've seen.

Looking at the flipside, we could say that no one should get any bonuses for attacking a single defender with a whole bunch of people. If you can organise your attack well enough, you just get the benefit of X people attacking one person. But this wouldn't really work. You'd get any experienced warrior making mincemeat out of all groups no matter how many people are attacking at the same time. Basically, the cumulative effect is important for realism in this situation of many people attacking one at the same time. AFAIK there's no effect like this for defensive/guarding coordination situations.

If there is/was something like this put in, would it sway things too much to benefit groups? Maybe, but not any more than the existing attack bonus, IMHO.

Swordsman

Added: I agree about not needing another skill in the list, but then maybe it wouldn't need to be implemented as a skill anyway (though that's what my idea was originally). Maybe it could just be added like the multiple attack bonus is now ... it depends on numbers instead of any one PC's skill. Just a thought.

[spawnloser]

I think the idea of an added bonus for defense isn't a bad idea.  Most game systems do include that effect due to the fact that lots of people whacking on someone is a pretty decent distraction when they're trying to attack someone.

[creeper386]

The defense bonus, comes from a good leader making sure their men are prepared... As well as MULTIPLE attempts at rescuing a person. One person can only rescue another person once every once in awhile. SIX PEOPLE can rescue someone SIX TIMEs every once in awhile... Even with the same chances... its the same. Plus... If all of YOUR people focus on one person and then continue rescuing the person... Which you can do. You still get the bonus of many people trying to rescue at once... AND you get to cut down the other person as well... A well thought out plan, even a small group can take a larger group... it's all through leadership skill thats already in place... Your characters RPed brains.


Creeper who thinks it's better to make the people behind the players better leaders... Then to use some skill.

[sancho]

- - I would like to offer an alternate to Swordsman's idea. While a leadership skill could never possibly work, a defensive bonus is an easily workable idea. A skill couldn't work due to the fact that there would be no way to determine what coded incidents should cause it to increase, and who was actually the leader at that time. However, consider this: the more people trying to rescue someone, the more likely it should be to succeed.

- - The reason is this: RESCUE is based upon someone either knocking a victim out of the way of an attacker (or otherwise coming between the attacker and victim), and then taking the victim's place. Each attempt should make the next attempt easier, because the attacker would have to keep repositioning themselves to focus attacks on the victim. I propose each rescue attempt be coded to make the next rescue attempt more likely to succeed, to reflect this.

- - This could be easily implemented by adding a variable to PCs and NPCs. The variable would be incremented with each failed rescue attempt, and reset to zero once the character's status changes from "fighting" to any other status. Thus, a good leader would order everyone to attempt to save the person under attack, and the combined effort would be reflected in the code.

- - I think the base idea is a good one, Swordsman. Keep 'em coming!


Designer Spice,
Sancho