How about a Karma System change?

[mansa]

Hey,

I feel that the Karma System could use some tweaks.

The idea that I feel is that there may be too many higher level karma classes in the game.  This is all just a feeling, but, I figure a subtle change might fix it.


The problem might be that people with 8 karma might be making high karma classes frequently after their last one died, so a way to prevent people from making sorcerer after sorcerer after sorcerer would be to have a time limit imposed on specific classes, after the last one died.

Consider it this way:

You make a Sorcerer.  You have to wait 6 months before you can make another.
You make a Nilazi.  You have to wait 5 months before you can make another.
You make a Mul.  You have to wait 4 months before you make another one.
You make a Krathi.  You have to wait 3 months before you can make another one.
You make a Vivaduan.  You have to wait 2 months before you can make another one.

6 months could be the longest that you have to wait.  The time left is visible in the character creation screen.
You could make a Sorcerer, die in a week, make a Rukkian, die, Nilazi, die, make a Krathi, die, make a second Rukkian, die, make a pickpocket, die, make a warrior, die, and then your 6 months are over and you can make another Sorcerer again.

Is 6 months too long?   Too short?   Is a change like this necessary?  Not necessary?  What do you think?

[Khorm]

I'm a little indifferent about the length of the time limits imposed, but I think this is a great idea.

I like the thought of seeing more mundanes as a result.

[Booshay]

I would like to see this. I don't have much else to add.

[musashi]

I would imagine that staff have this regulated in a soft policy kind of way already. The amount of 8 karma players is no doubt quite a bit smaller than the amount of 1-4 karma players so I would assume that if staff sees someone making sorcerer after sorcerer after mindbender, they will probably just decline the next character with a note about them having played it too much.

In my experience, I've had staff do this with 0-karma roles. I once got an app declined with a message informing that me that while I played <race/guild> very well ... my last few characters had all been the same race/guild. And it was gently suggested that I try something different.

... ... I protested a bit, and got my next PC approved anyway, though now that I look back on it I feel like I should have taken their advice  

But that's beside the point, I just mean to say that it seems to me like the staff are already watching for this kind of thing.

But, on the flip side, maybe an offical policy would mean less workload for them to deal with.  

[Kryos]

Honestly, I'm glad karma is what it is and roles are restricted by it.  If anything, I would appreciate it if some things (Half giants specifically) were higher on the karma chain.  Mages grind-casting their spells or half-giants acting like humans in a bigger skin are all too common all ready. 

I wish staff would drop a serious hammer on this kind of activity and/or put a shitton more scrutiny on the roles.

[Akaramu]

Mages grind-casting their spells or half-giants acting like humans in a bigger skin are all too common all ready. 

I wish staff would drop a serious hammer on this kind of activity and/or put a shitton more scrutiny on the roles.

Huh? The half-giant example is bad roleplay, yeah... but what's wrong with grind-casting mages, if it is IC for them to practice often? It's pretty much the same as the Byn runner who shows up for sparring every morning. Except for the fact that the mage doesn't need a sparring partner - which is great for off peak players.

[Kryos]

Because much like Tektolnes, I get the impression some people have their Objective set to:  branch.  They'll find flimsy excuses for it.  This is a broad, sweeping statement I realize.  And it certainly doesn't apply to a lot of beautifully played people I meet on a daily basis in game.  

What should be happening, in my opinion, is Lord Templar Muckymuck comes along as says to you, "Oh hey gemmer scum.  I want <blah>."  Then you set about to doing/getting blah, plying your skills.  Same for Big Boss Man dictating, or some hardcore MFer surviving in the wastes on her/his wit and skill.  In other words, your use of your character's capabilities should be dependent on the IG world, not because people sit down and say, "Oh boy, I'd love to branch today."

It is my personal observation that number of players are more like Tek then person-under-heel.  Not all, heck, probably not even a majority.  But there must be enough to make me feel this way, eh?

edit:  Polish.  And to add there are *definitely* mundanes doing this out there too.  That should be the difference between a player with 0 karma and their first.  And I'm not ashamed to admit it was what earned me my first:  learning its a game about acting on the world, not about being the magiest mage to ever mage or warriorest warrior to ever warrior. 

[AmandaGreathouse]

OP: I'm really not a fan of the idea of putting more restrictions and limitations on karma roles OOC like that. If they have enough karma to be trusted with the role of a drovian or a nilazi etc, then they worked their ass off and usually spent years proving trustworthy to play it. If it becomes an issue, it will be noted and taken into account. I have some karma myself and I don't mind saying, I've been busting my ass for over two years now and I'd feel very aggravated at having that put into place. Sometimes, you want to play a vivaduan, you make one, and it dies in three hours. Yeah, you could just not play Arm for two months because that's what you want to play and you don't want to play yet another ranger. Or you could play the role that staff trusts you enough to play all day long.

As to the idea of mages 'grindcasting': On the one hand, I very much agree that it's bullshit. On the other hand, you have a lot of restrictions placed on you with regards to not being able to go places and do things under certain conditions and I feel there's nothing wrong with doing what you 'can' do while trapped (essentially). Be it 'grindcasting', talking over the Way, crafting, or what have you. It's the situations in which people are playing out a scene and such and you can tell that someone's casting their way to empty, rping, stand, no emotes or anything and do it again, disruptively, those are where I think it crosses a line.

[Cutthroat]

Do whatever keeps rare roles rare. However, I don't think a timer as originally proposed is necessarily the best way to go about it.

I would imagine that staff have this regulated in a soft policy kind of way already. The amount of 8 karma players is no doubt quite a bit smaller than the amount of 1-4 karma players so I would assume that if staff sees someone making sorcerer after sorcerer after mindbender, they will probably just decline the next character with a note about them having played it too much.
...
But that's beside the point, I just mean to say that it seems to me like the staff are already watching for this kind of thing.

I agree with this. The staff will be able to pick out people that are sticking to the same kind of roles already, and players with all this karma should know when to cut it out with their obsession with guild_whatever anyway. They should know the characters they are playing are rare, and likely won't have a problem keeping their PC alive for longer than whatever timer is set in place. A timer would also likely mean that players that will want to bypass that timer will have to put in special apps, so there will be an increased workload there.

[Zoltan]

I don't think a timer's necessary for the super high karma roles. I have a feeling that if the staff gives someone sorc karma, they know the player isn't going to get butt hurt if they say "hey, you've played two sorcerers of doom in a row now, how about trying a pickpocket or something."

[FantasyWriter]

I like the idea of the timers.
It seems to me that it would lighten staff load and make the game balance out a bit better.

[Pale Horse]

Chiming in to say that in my own experience, Staff does keep a running tab on the number of higher end Karma guilds and races that are already represented by PCs in the game.  I too have had applications turned down with a note explaining that "there are too many of [such-and-such-guild/race] in the game at this time.  Try again next month."  While I have never had an app. rejected for having played a certain guild over and over again, I will admit to being guilty of having done this.  I had something like 4 or 5 characters, one after another, of a certain higher end magicker guild once.  3 of them didn't live more than a couple RL weeks, but the last two spanned several months.  I'm glad I choose to switch it up after the last one died and went back to a mundane guild, as when I requested my account notes, it had been noted that I was playing a lot of [such-and-such-guild] as of late.  Something of a wake up call, there, and a sheepish realization that I should let someone else have a turn, as it were.

As for mansa's idea of a time limit..it could just be my own knee-jerk reaction to change or the idea of an extra limitation set on the level of krama I have been entrusted with, but I'm only thinking up ways in which I do not like the idea.  Ways like "I spent a good while thinking up that concept for a Psion, and now I have to wait 6 months to try again because I happened to be in the wrong place when that New player thought I was an NPC and killed me for my loot?."  Sure this stuff happens already.  This is a perma-death game after all, and we'd have to rethink up an awesome idea (or not so awesome.  Maybe just average that eventually grows into awesome) for the next character, but if I wanted to try a Psi again after having had my character die at the 3 hour mark..I would think having the 8th level of karma should allow me to try it again, without having to wait 6 months.

..On the other hand, Staff has proven (to me, anyway) to be a group of reasonable people, and in such a situation I could probably have a new Psi at my fingertips if I sent an email in explaining the situation and asking politely if I could make the attempt again before my timer had expired...

And now I'm just arguing with myself, on the GDB.  I'll come back when I'm more coherent.

[FantasyWriter]

 I too have had applications turned down with a note explaining that "there are too many of [such-and-such-guild/race] in the game at this time.  Try again next month."  

Another possible benefit from the timers.

[Pale Horse]

 I too have had applications turned down with a note explaining that "there are too many of [such-and-such-guild/race] in the game at this time.  Try again next month."  

Another possible benefit from the timers.

Meaning that such notes would not appear, if there was an imposed time limit keeping everything in check?  My immediate thought is that they would pop up, anyway.  People's timers counting down at different time, so that by the time my own has run it's course and I submit an app..I could have "The Note" sent back to me, explaining that 7 other people have had their times run down during this period, but they got their apps in 2 days before I did.  Better luck next time.

[jhunter]

I agree with Sorcs, psions, and nilazi. The rest I don't feel need any sort of time limit before creating another. Anything more than those feels like OOC capping of the others when realistically there are plenty of the others in the gameworld all the time. There are also plenty of others who do not play anything other than mundanes so, in the case of the elementalists, they would not get replenished as often when they die making for less interaction for those gemmers who continue to live.

[FantasyWriter]

I too have had applications turned down with a note explaining that "there are too many of [such-and-such-guild/race] in the game at this time.  Try again next month." 

Another possible benefit from the timers.

Meaning that such notes would not appear, if there was an imposed time limit keeping everything in check?  My immediate thought is that they would pop up, anyway.  People's timers counting down at different time, so that by the time my own has run it's course and I submit an app..I could have "The Note" sent back to me, explaining that 7 other people have had their times run down during this period, but they got their apps in 2 days before I did.  Better luck next time.

While that's possible, I still believe it would help.  I would assume that limiting special applications to three a year made people much less likely to submit an app unless they had every single detailed worked out and wanted to play the idea more than any other concept they had in their head.  Read: no spec apping on a whim just because they could twelve times a year.

I agree with Sorcs, psions, and nilazi. The rest I don't feel need any sort of time limit before creating another.

I agree.

[Akaramu]

I would like if mindbenders were application only and not even open for 8 karma players. There is ALWAYS too many of them. And players who don't have 8 karma don't get a chance to app for one because there's always too many already.

[deviant storm]

I too have had applications turned down with a note explaining that "there are too many of [such-and-such-guild/race] in the game at this time.  Try again next month." 

Another possible benefit from the timers.

Meaning that such notes would not appear, if there was an imposed time limit keeping everything in check?  My immediate thought is that they would pop up, anyway.  People's timers counting down at different time, so that by the time my own has run it's course and I submit an app..I could have "The Note" sent back to me, explaining that 7 other people have had their times run down during this period, but they got their apps in 2 days before I did.  Better luck next time.

I agree with this. Staff will always have to keep an eye on the numbers, simply because there will be times when more than one person wants a certain role.

Besides, I too believe that if someone is trusted enough by staff then they're going to either know not to make umpteen nilazi one after another, or they're going to listen if staff says 'do something else for a while'.

[Thorg]

The change to '3 special apps a year' has meant I'm far less likely to try higher karma roles because I know too well how a dumb decision and a lack of knowledge about how the game 'works' can result in an early death, no matter how big my application was/how excited I was about getting into the game.

So instead I'm interested in working towards achieving karma first then trying out new roles. Slapping an arbitrary period of time between how often I can play things is to me, a player who dies a lot, another limitation meaning the reward that is karma is diminished.

As far as I'm aware, caring about how other people are playing is inversely related to how much I enjoy the game. I trust that magickers, benders and half giants will be given to those who've proven they can handle the roles and that Staff will worry about the balance and quality. You know, Staff things.

[Schrodingers Cat]

The change to '3 special apps a year' has meant I'm far less likely to try higher karma roles because I know too well how a dumb decision and a lack of knowledge about how the game 'works' can result in an early death, no matter how big my application was/how excited I was about getting into the game.

This kind of thing happens more than one might think, not just with high karma guilds, but probably more frequently when someone is new to them.  Learning to play a sorcerer or a psionicist is much the same as learning to play a ranger/warrior.  A person might go through several before getting things 'right'.  This is also one of the drawbacks of special applications, because one minor mistake and that special role is over.

While players mixing things up is a good think, a blanket policy isn't necessarily a good thing I don't think.  If someone were to make a sorcerer and die shortly after entering the game, should they be restricted from making another high karma role, for a time?  What if a person plays an extremely long lived mundane type role that lasts for a real life year or so, the time they spent playing a mundane role wouldn't be taken into account under a system like this.

I think an arbitrary limit would be more of a drawback than it would help to balance karma guild/race distribution.

[mansa]

- I would like to see 1 karma to be given to all accounts that have at least 1 year since the creation of their account, and 2 karma automatically be given to anybody who has had their account for 2 years.


Obviously, the change I wrote about in the original post and the change listed above only affects people who actually have the karma for the classes specifically, and wouldn't have anything to do with a special application.

If you've been trusted with Whiran karma, you don't need to special app a Whiran again.


I just don't know how well the current system scales, when you have 100 people on a night, 150 people on a night, 200 people on a night, 250 people on a night, and I'm always looking towards the future, which is bigger and better than what you might expect.  How well are the playerbase guilds / races observed?  Is it strictly some immortal who is watching a specific player, or does all immortals look back at the last 5 characters someone made?  What if an immortal doesn't bother to look back at the last 5 characters, and say, 'Oh, hey, it's mansa again.  no spelling mistakes.  approved.' solely based on the account in question.  Could it possibly be a lack of looking further deeper into the account in question?

I mean, the immortal staff are all volunteers.  If you get 100 applications a week, how much time are you going to invest into these applications.  5 minutes per application?  2?  10?  Doing research about something does take a bit of time and energy, and not everybody has time and energy to spend.

If there was a coded system in place, something that is fair to the playerbase at hand, I'm sure it would release some time to be spent on other things.

You could put in code changes that say this:

If player makes Whiran, and dies within 3 hours, do not take away whiran option.  If whiran survives longer than 3 hours, take away whiran option for 3 months.



I mean, who knows?  Maybe all of the race / guild of the playerbase is already being tracked down in a fancy spreadsheet that displays which race is online the longest at a time per players, and which one is most popular, and which one only stays in which zone...

[Kryos]

I wouldn't be surprised, knowing Morg. But, on topic, If this timer system went in *on top* of current karma system, I'd love it.  You would not have situations where you see what feels like the same player doing the same guy several times in a row with karma classes/races.

[Akoto]

Personally, I have no interest in seeing timers applied to karma roles. Karma is a reward which represents a level of trust between the player and staff. The player has earned the privilege to apply for those guilds whenever they like, because they have shown they can handle the associated power with maturity and restraint.

If staff has an issue with someone playing the same thing several times in a row, I'm sure they could simply turn down the application. Otherwise, what you are proposing is basically another version of the special applications restriction, only for people who've worked hard enough that they don't have to go through that process. This is all setting aside the fact that two characters of the same guild can be vastly different concepts, just like any warrior or ranger.

[Kryos]

Ok, first, a qualification:  I've been staff in a couple muds/games in my years.  Statement that qualified:  Staff are not the all seeing all knowing . . . you know the rest from fight club.  I don't have any clue what the internal mechanics are staff side here, but I suspect they do *not* know, unless they actively look or you have a prominent account name, what your last character was.

So *if* that feature doesn't exist, perhaps a quick way to look at the character histories of a person applying would be useful, so trends could be recognized.  If not that, then timers, please.

[Bast]

I like the system as is. I trust the staff to notice if someones playing there 19th sorcerer in a row.

[Akoto]

Ok, first, a qualification:  I've been staff in a couple muds/games in my years.  Statement that qualified:  Staff are not the all seeing all knowing . . . you know the rest from fight club.  I don't have any clue what the internal mechanics are staff side here, but I suspect they do *not* know, unless they actively look or you have a prominent account name, what your last character was.

So *if* that feature doesn't exist, perhaps a quick way to look at the character histories of a person applying would be useful, so trends could be recognized.  If not that, then timers, please.

Your character's information is recorded in your account notes. Class, race, means of death, all of that. Trust me when I say that they are quite vigilant. I'm one of the people who contributed to the creation of the 'three specapps per year' rule by way of my own abundant applications.

Just recently, staff asked me to play a different race or two for a month, because I had played a few of a certain one in a row. I hadn't done anything wrong. They just watch, and when necessary, ask for a shift in the pattern.

[Jenred]

The whole system is unbalanced as it is.
Before applying time-limits to Karma classes, the whole Karma system itself needs to be adjusted.

The time limit thing seems like more or less a stop-gap fix to prevent an influx of alot of the same type of class.

When to me, the real -underlying- question is, why is a player with 8 Karma even applying for 2-3 or 4 or whatever, Psions/Sorcs/Nilazis. in a limited time frame?

If they are the type of player to be trusted with 8 Karma, expected to run plots, basically be trusted to play the characters without much supervision, then something is wrong if they are burning through that many characters in a limited time frame. And perhaps the player should be re-evaluated as to whether or not it was a good choice to award that amount of Karma in the first place.

If this is not the problem, and the Official Opinion is that there is no association between character-longevity and player-trustworthiness, then the whole post becomes a moot point.





All that being said, the Karma system is systematically subjected to everyone's opinions of what it is or should be. I believe that player trustworthiness has no relevant connection to number of characters. Sometimes things happen, and just because you had a bad luck incident in your first week of playing shouldn't mean that you should be banned from a guild that you were deemed trustworthy enough to play.

[Akoto]

All that being said, the Karma system is systematically subjected to everyone's opinions of what it is or should be. I believe that player trustworthiness has no relevant connection to number of characters. Sometimes things happen, and just because you had a bad luck incident in your first week of playing shouldn't mean that you should be banned from a guild that you were deemed trustworthy enough to play.

The above quote is pretty much my answer to the remainder of your commentary. Shit happens, to borrow the old saying. Remember that most karma roles are mages who, unless Gemmed, live under constant threat of being hunted and killed.

Repeat deaths are hardly a rare thing for these concepts. That's especially true of muls, who are always escaped slaves, and even more so of Nilazi/Sorcerers/Psions. Yes, they're high karma, but they pay for it by being the creatures universally hated and hunted by everyone in the game world (with a few sparse exceptions). The most powerful guilds tend to conversely be the least likely to survive due to the built in stigma.

[LoD]

One of the major issues with today's game, as it pertains the repeat play of high-karma roles, is that the current culture positions them as global antagonists straight out of chargen.  Sorcerers and Psionicists are generally killed upon sight/discovery, escaped muls are generally captured or put to death, and elementalists have only a handful of options to peacefully exist and pursue their abilities.  Mundane characters almost always accrue friend and foe as a product of their in-game actions and decisions, not as a product of their OOC class choice.

Repeat play of these high-karma roles often artificially raises their negative footprint on the game (especially where mundanes are concerned) because their access to productive, positive, and cooperative oriented plot lines are limited by several factors, such as the fairly small player base, the perpetuated fear of magick and psionicists in most civilizations, and the resource-intensive slavery system.  It's no wonder that many of these karma-related roles are more heavily "felt" by the surrounding players than any number of half-elven rangers, human warriors, or dwarven assassins.

Mundane characters are also frequently hamstrung by the documentation and culture, forced to view many of these high-karma roles as opposition from the moment they're revealed and to immediately treat them with fear, hostility, and malice without them so much as opening their mouths to speak.  This isn't to say that everyone adheres to these generalizations, but we're often reminded via frequent threads on the GDB to follow the documentation in our interactions.

The karma system is not to blame, as a much larger part of the game would need to be overhauled if you're to have any hope of curbing the negative ripples people occasionally feel as a result of the current design with respect to high-karma roles.  The issues with repeat play are merely indicators of a much harder problem to solve -- one which will probably have to wait until Armageddon 2 to be properly addressed.

-LoD

[Kryos]

Your character's information is recorded in your account notes. Class, race, means of death, all of that. Trust me when I say that they are quite vigilant. I'm one of the people who contributed to the creation of the 'three specapps per year' rule by way of my own abundant applications.

Just recently, staff asked me to play a different race or two for a month, because I had played a few of a certain one in a row. I hadn't done anything wrong. They just watch, and when necessary, ask for a shift in the pattern.

Right . .  I'm not . . . a new player.  Any and everyone knows this.  My point is, is it something the staff can easily access while looking at your app, or is it currently tedious to do such?

[Kryos]

LoD, your post brings up a whole slew of points I don't agree with.  A player with 8 karma should know how to rock the socks off a nil/sorc/psion in such a way that quick death from identification doesn *not* happen.  If its happening often, they may need to consider if they are really capable of playing any of those.  Muls are a different story, but with a tinge of imagination, that problem is solved too.

In short, I totally disagree with your post, top to bottom.  If you objective: branch and grind your coded skills while in those kinds of roles and get smushed, I've 0 pity for you.  Look around.  See that guy at the bar next to you?  He's probably a sorc.  That guy at the table?  Psion.  And that bright and cheery guy everyone loves:  Nil.  That's how its done.

[Akoto]

Right . .  I'm not . . . a new player.  Any and everyone knows this.  My point is, is it something the staff can easily access while looking at your app, or is it currently tedious to do such?

I didn't mean to insinuate that you were. Just stating what I did in the course of the discussion. No offense intended.

If I had to guess (which is all I can do in this case), I'd say they could readily look at the information if they needed to, yes. In my case, they just knew from observing the trend.

[Gimfalisette]

A player with 8 karma should know how to rock the socks off a nil/sorc/psion in such a way that quick death from identification doesn *not* happen.

That, I really don't agree with. It's totally possible to have the karma to play X and to not have a clue, codedly, about how X works. If you don't have a clue about how X works codedly, then you're highly likely to get picked off immediately.

My point is, is it something the staff can easily access while looking at your app, or is it currently tedious to do such?

Based on my very limited knowledge of ARM's data structure, I would guess that this is probably more tedious and less easy to do.



I don't really think we need any changes to the current karma system. That is not to say that I think the system is awesome; I don't. But I don't think putting bandages on it is going to improve anything.

[FantasyWriter]

Your character's information is recorded in your account notes. Class, race, means of death, all of that. Trust me when I say that they are quite vigilant. I'm one of the people who contributed to the creation of the 'three specapps per year' rule by way of my own abundant applications.

Just recently, staff asked me to play a different race or two for a month, because I had played a few of a certain one in a row. I hadn't done anything wrong. They just watch, and when necessary, ask for a shift in the pattern.

Right . .  I'm not . . . a new player.  Any and everyone knows this.  My point is, is it something the staff can easily access while looking at your app, or is it currently tedious to do such?

When I was a noob, I was busted at least twice for trying to bring back concepts I had played three or four PCs back.

[Reiloth]

I think a lot of the higher karma roles require a few 'go throughs' before you really get how to play them.

[jmordetsky]

I dig it. Mansa is awesome.

[LoD]

LoD, your post brings up a whole slew of points I don't agree with.  A player with 8 karma should know how to rock the socks off a nil/sorc/psion in such a way that quick death from identification doesn *not* happen.  If its happening often, they may need to consider if they are really capable of playing any of those.  Muls are a different story, but with a tinge of imagination, that problem is solved too.

In short, I totally disagree with your post, top to bottom.  If you objective: branch and grind your coded skills while in those kinds of roles and get smushed, I've 0 pity for you.  Look around.  See that guy at the bar next to you?  He's probably a sorc.  That guy at the table?  Psion.  And that bright and cheery guy everyone loves:  Nil.  That's how its done.

You don't actually seem to be disagreeing with anything that -I- said.  Perhaps there was a misunderstanding.

I wasn't claiming that people are having problems with their sorcs, psionicists, and muls surviving;  I imagine that quite a few of them are very successful in keeping their characters alive and well -- though, as Gimfalisette's response touches on, karma isn't a measure of one's understanding of code or class mechanics, but of the staff's trust in that person to play the role responsibly, no matter what that role may be.  There are a few karma classes that I've never tried, even though I've played the game for almost 20 years.

What I was saying is that mundane players will often feel the "presence" of high-karma classes (sorcs, muls, psi's) in a more consistently negative way, because almost all of them begin in opposition of our characters by virtue of the culture and documentation.  I was implying that a large-scale change to the system could present a world where these high-karma class roles aren't viewed as global villains, and are, instead, judged upon their IG actions and decisions, which opens up avenues for many of them not to be perceived as monsters, villains, and murderers against whom most characters are currently universally aligned.

Players feel the presence of repeat-players not because karma is failing us or that karma-class players cannot keep their characters alive, but because the culture and documentation of the current game put them at a disadvantage for achieving cooperative, peaceful, or collaborative relationships without someone usually bending the rules a bit, and I think that could be changed to allow for a broader spectrum of interaction while narrowing the criteria for which someone is lumped into the "enemy/monster" category.

Karma restrictions would be attacking the wrong problem.

-LoD

[Jenred]

Your character's information is recorded in your account notes. Class, race, means of death, all of that. Trust me when I say that they are quite vigilant. I'm one of the people who contributed to the creation of the 'three specapps per year' rule by way of my own abundant applications.

Just recently, staff asked me to play a different race or two for a month, because I had played a few of a certain one in a row. I hadn't done anything wrong. They just watch, and when necessary, ask for a shift in the pattern.

Right . .  I'm not . . . a new player.  Any and everyone knows this.  My point is, is it something the staff can easily access while looking at your app, or is it currently tedious to do such?

Its not a tedious process. And there are not usually a large number of applications in the pool at any given time.
If you have a high-school education, it can take anywhere from 2-5 minutes to read an application, and another 5 minutes to check their account.
An app that requires a bunch of changes can take a total of 30 minutes.

[spicemustflow]

Just recently, staff asked me to play a different race or two for a month, because I had played a few of a certain one in a row.

Weird. Did you recycle your descriptions or concepts? Or have played only one guild/sub combo?

[Sephiroto]

I think a lot of the higher karma roles require a few 'go throughs' before you really get how to play them.

Or until you're fortunate enough to live the required time to grow strong enough to protect yourself from 90+% of the mundane population and the few rampaging, maxed-out elementalists.  Sometimes it is pure luck to survive.  I was lucky to be successful with my first sorcerer.  My second wasn't so fortunate, and it wasn't due to ignorance of how to play the class.

High-karma roles often have a survival rate comparable to a 1st Lieutenant in Vietnam.  Most of them are fragged early on.  Those who manage to survive usually become heros or villians.

On another note, I was thinking that if the special application process was more detailed and if the staff was more liberal with what high-karma players could roll through that process, then we might notice a lot less competition for those psionicist roles, see less sorcerers of doom and come across a lower number of rogue mages.

A lot of times I only want to play a mage or veteran combat character just so I can keep up with the Jonses.  There are just too many players I personally know who are so obsessed with getting their skills up and use the most outlandish methods to do it.  A lot of times I feel pressured to follow similar patterns just so I can stand a chance.

I'd probably go 2-3 years without playing another high karma guild if I could routine special app mundane classes with boosted skills.  Personally, I feel like playing Armageddon is an arms race.  Playing Amos the butter-fingered pickpocket or Malik the 0 day warrior just isn't as fun as it used to be in the days where MOST of the playerbase was mundane or didn't know how to branch their parry skill in an obscenely short time.

[janeshephard]

The problem might be that people with 8 karma might be making high karma classes frequently after their last one died, so a way to prevent people from making sorcerer after sorcerer after sorcerer would be to have a time limit imposed on specific classes, after the last one died.

I asked specifically about this in an email to the staff. As long as you have the karma you can reroll the same karma restricted race or guild to your heart's content. As far as I can tell I never met the same exact reincarnated sorcerer, or mul over and over and over in-game. So "might be" may very well be "very rarely has it ever happened.

[Akoto]

Weird. Did you recycle your descriptions or concepts? Or have played only one guild/sub combo?

Nope. It was a karmic race, though, and staff didn't want me to pigeonhole myself. I didn't take issue with it, at any rate.

[jcarter]

I like the system as is. I trust the staff to notice if someones playing there 19th sorcerer in a row.

The issue isn't necessarily playing something 19 times in a row, although I understand  you're just throwing a number out there. Sorcerers and other high-karma guilds are things that need to stay rare and out of sight. Playing one sorcerer after the other comes across as just inappropriate and too much. As LoD said, repeat playing of it can leave a negative footprint.

My view on the matter is that players shouldn't have 8 karma, and that sorcerers and psions should be kept special-app only. Keeping these two guilds specapp allows for better monitoring of who's playing them, how many are running around, and the general background of the character, as well as limiting their numbers.  If you're that determined to play a sorcerer or psion, waiting two or so weeks for the special app shouldn't be an issue.  This would also stifle any issue, if there is even one at all, of people rolling psion after psion after psion or whatever.

[jhunter]

 

Playing Amos the butter-fingered pickpocket or Malik the 0 day warrior just isn't as fun as it used to be in the days where MOST of the playerbase was mundane or didn't know how to branch their parry skill in an obscenely short time.

I feel that the addition of stat prioritization contributed greatly to this as well. Almost every character you run across is prioritized optimally for their class.

[janeshephard]

Playing Amos the butter-fingered pickpocket or Malik the 0 day warrior just isn't as fun as it used to be in the days where MOST of the playerbase was mundane or didn't know how to branch their parry skill in an obscenely short time.

I feel that the addition of stat prioritization contributed greatly to this as well. Almost every character you run across is prioritized optimally for their class.

I wouldn't play a weak character, or a butter-fingered pick pocket. If that's your thing do it. I like to play capable characters. Where exactly does me doing this impact the game in a negative way? Why isn't it as much fun?

To put it in perspective, if my character and your character fit in the game world, who cares if they're badass magickers or pickpockets?

[Pale Horse]

I wouldn't play a weak character, or a butter-fingered pick pocket. If that's your thing do it. I like to play capable characters. Where exactly does me doing this impact the game in a negative way? Why isn't it as much fun?

To put it in perspective, if my character and your character fit in the game world, who cares if they're badass magickers or pickpockets?

Obviously some do, or this thread wouldn't exist  

I have enough trust in our Staff to put the brakes on anyone they deem supplying a high amount of 6-8 karma restricted classes/races where they do not wish having that many in the game at a certain point in time.

If they're fine with someone who has earned their trust to have the highly esteemed (sorta) 8th level of karma playing Sorcerer after Psion after Nilazi, etc, then it's fine with me.  If it bothers me, I'll just find an area where I'm more than likely never to run into them, if I can even recognize them for what they are.

[Deedee]

Playing Amos the butter-fingered pickpocket or Malik the 0 day warrior just isn't as fun as it used to be in the days where MOST of the playerbase was mundane or didn't know how to branch their parry skill in an obscenely short time.

I feel that the addition of stat prioritization contributed greatly to this as well. Almost every character you run across is prioritized optimally for their class.

I wouldn't play a weak character, or a butter-fingered pick pocket. If that's your thing do it. I like to play capable characters. Where exactly does me doing this impact the game in a negative way? Why isn't it as much fun?

To put it in perspective, if my character and your character fit in the game world, who cares if they're badass magickers or pickpockets?

I've played a character with poor/below average/average/poor.  Stats like that are totally playable, and can make a character's life fun and interesting.  They simply require more patience, because if you're too anxious to advance your characters' coded skills, you're not going to enjoy the role with these stats.  There are always ways to get around limitations that lower stats provide.

[LoD]

I wouldn't play a weak character, or a butter-fingered pick pocket. If that's your thing do it. I like to play capable characters. Where exactly does me doing this impact the game in a negative way? Why isn't it as much fun?

To put it in perspective, if my character and your character fit in the game world, who cares if they're badass magickers or pickpockets?

Jane, I think what he means is that he finds himself forced to choose classes with a swift ascension to coded power (e.g. magickers, psionicists), because he perceives the current game culture to have enough of a skill-oriented element that it prohibitively disadvantages his slow-to-improve mundane concepts.  I don't necessarily agree, but I believe that's where he was going when he mentioned he'd be much more likely to play a pick-pocket if he were to receive some type of beginning skill boost.

It wasn't about whether the character was being played as a capable person, but whether they were capable of competing on a coded level with the other established characters in-game.  In that context, many people will care if players are simply able to make characters that are instantly accomplished and skilled without having to invest any time in that power.  The time we spend investing in a given character impacts our decision-making process.  If someone handed you a model glider and you recklessly throw it and break it, you probably won't feel too bad -- especially if they're ready to simply handy you another model glider.  But if you had to build that model glider from scratch every time prior to the throw, you'd probably recognize that your throwing motion was more cautious, practiced, and determined, especially if crashing meant you'd have to build another completely from scratch.

The changes to the elementalist class created a much easier and faster path to coded power with minimal risk to the character.  With little to no interaction with other characters, one can fairly quickly eclipse the usefulness and ability of most mundane classes with the same amount of playing-time.  Because of this, some players seem to treat the elementalist class as their only choice if their goal is to somehow impact the game world in a meaningful or widespread way, and I think that's really unfortunate.  If elementalists weren't so easy to improve, several people would probably stop repeat-playing them -- it should really be interpreted as a class mechanic failure, and it's been debated before whether there was anything to stop/slow the repeat play of high-karma classes.

Too much of the Arm 1 culture is stacked against this ever reverting, however, and I don't think any karma regulations would really have enough of an impact to decrease the negative ripples certain players feel as a result of it.  I also don't mean to paint it as an aspect of the game that makes it unplayable, but simply that treating the symptoms doesn't solve the problem.

-LoD

[Kryos]

A lot of times I only want to play a mage or veteran combat character just so I can keep up with the Jonses.  There are just too many players I personally know who are so obsessed with getting their skills up and use the most outlandish methods to do it.  A lot of times I feel pressured to follow similar patterns just so I can stand a chance.

Saw this, made me sick to my stomach.  If you know people are behaving this way, please do your duty to your fellow players and file a character complaint.  Objective: branch characters should be crushed with swift brutality.

[janeshephard]

I wouldn't play a weak character, or a butter-fingered pick pocket. If that's your thing do it. I like to play capable characters. Where exactly does me doing this impact the game in a negative way? Why isn't it as much fun?

To put it in perspective, if my character and your character fit in the game world, who cares if they're badass magickers or pickpockets?

Jane, I think what he means is that he finds himself forced to choose classes with a swift ascension to coded power (e.g. magickers, psionicists), because he perceives the current game culture to have enough of a skill-oriented element that it prohibitively disadvantages his slow-to-improve mundane concepts.  I don't necessarily agree, but I believe that's where he was going when he mentioned he'd be much more likely to play a pick-pocket if he were to receive some type of beginning skill boost.

-LoD

I appreciate a clear response to my question. I suspect most players aren't doing this but I may be in the minority. I mean, yeah, I've seen combat characters love to spar, or magickers love to experiment and further their skills. I tend to like building up my character. I haven't received any negative feedback about this yet. I'm not doing it to "keep up with the jonses" though. Although, interestingly enough, doing that to keep up with the populace of Zalanthas seems very Zalanthian.

[jmordetsky]

A lot of times I only want to play a mage or veteran combat character just so I can keep up with the Jonses.  There are just too many players I personally know who are so obsessed with getting their skills up and use the most outlandish methods to do it.  A lot of times I feel pressured to follow similar patterns just so I can stand a chance.

Saw this, made me sick to my stomach.  If you know people are behaving this way, please do your duty to your fellow players and file a character complaint.  Objective: branch characters should be crushed with swift brutality.

I don't think it should make you sick - I think it's way more common then you might think. I agree it's wrong - but - I also think it's human and normal to feel that way. Especially when you're trying to survive and your enemies/competition are using these tactics. That said -I don't think the Karma system is to blame. It's the fact that skill levels are capped the way they are. I'm going to post something about it, but I wanted to get approval from the staff first.

[mansa]

The changes to the elementalist class created a much easier and faster path to coded power with minimal risk to the character.  With little to no interaction with other characters, one can fairly quickly eclipse the usefulness and ability of most mundane classes with the same amount of playing-time.  Because of this, some players seem to treat the elementalist class as their only choice if their goal is to somehow impact the game world in a meaningful or widespread way, and I think that's really unfortunate.  If elementalists weren't so easy to improve, several people would probably stop repeat-playing them -- it should really be interpreted as a class mechanic failure, and it's been debated before whether there was anything to stop/slow the repeat play of high-karma classes.

Too much of the Arm 1 culture is stacked against this ever reverting, however, and I don't think any karma regulations would really have enough of an impact to decrease the negative ripples certain players feel as a result of it.  I also don't mean to paint it as an aspect of the game that makes it unplayable, but simply that treating the symptoms doesn't solve the problem.

-LoD

Are you sure that the playerbase can't handle a reverting of skill progression?

I mean, if you can full branch out a magicker in 100 hours of gameplay, and the rest of the mundane guilds take at least 500 hours of gameplay, doesn't that seem unfair?

Magickers are supposed to be scary, yes, but they aren't supposed to be game controlling characters via their skills and only their skills, and so quickly!  Magickers should have to make friends, in order to get more powerful.

I think a code change to make magickers branch more slowly would maybe upset the playerbase for a week, maybe two weeks, but the point is to have fun, not to be able to max out your skills.

Sometimes you need to step in and say, 'This code change was put forth with the intention that the game was ending soon, and people wanted to become powerful faster.  Since the game isn't ending in 6 months, and players will be around for longer than 6 months, the progression of skills will take longer, much like how it was'  If that's what you're saying happened, LoD.

I'm just guessing here.

[jstorrie]

I also think that magicker skill progression is not well-balanced with skill progressions of other classes. I think the magick skill trees should be re-evaluated such that 'young' magickers are not so fragile out-of-the-box, and then branching and casting-power should be tweaked to increase at slower rates. The higher-tier skills of (most, but not all) the mundane classes require intense amounts of play to reach, whereas a 'gicker can 'max' in less time and without ever going outside. I don't mind magickers being on the overall 'more powerful' than the mundane classes, but they shouldn't live in a world of their own.

[janeshephard]

I also think that magicker skill progression is not well-balanced with skill progressions of other classes. I think the magick skill trees should be re-evaluated such that 'young' magickers are not so fragile out-of-the-box, and then branching and casting-power should be tweaked to increase at slower rates. The higher-tier skills of (most, but not all) the mundane classes require intense amounts of play to reach, whereas a 'gicker can 'max' in less time and without ever going outside. I don't mind magickers being on the overall 'more powerful' than the mundane classes, but they shouldn't live in a world of their own.

Magickers live on a world of their own because it is difficult to remain incognito. Start making the world a little more magick friendly, and there are ways of doing this without breaking things, before you swing a nerf bat.

[Pale Horse]

I don't mind magickers being on the overall 'more powerful' than the mundane classes, but they shouldn't live in a world of their own.

Not to pick on you, but yes, in many ways magickers do indeed live in a "world of their own."  They are ostracized from socializing with normal people.  In Allanak they are segregated into a section of the city to keep them away from the general populous.  In the wastes, if they are not powerful they are quickly killed be it by the land it's self, animals, other magickers or bands of gith and raiders.

The documentation and the so called magicker hate threads that pop up every so often on the board all point towards magickers often being kept in their own places in the world, thus making the average magicker either very alone or forced to live with his own kind in an artificial "world of their own."

[jalden]

Hey,

I feel that the Karma System could use some tweaks.

The idea that I feel is that there may be too many higher level karma classes in the game.  This is all just a feeling, but, I figure a subtle change might fix it.


The problem might be that people with 8 karma might be making high karma classes frequently after their last one died, so a way to prevent people from making sorcerer after sorcerer after sorcerer would be to have a time limit imposed on specific classes, after the last one died.

Consider it this way:

You make a Sorcerer.  You have to wait 6 months before you can make another.
You make a Nilazi.  You have to wait 5 months before you can make another.
You make a Mul.  You have to wait 4 months before you make another one.
You make a Krathi.  You have to wait 3 months before you can make another one.
You make a Vivaduan.  You have to wait 2 months before you can make another one.

6 months could be the longest that you have to wait.  The time left is visible in the character creation screen.
You could make a Sorcerer, die in a week, make a Rukkian, die, Nilazi, die, make a Krathi, die, make a second Rukkian, die, make a pickpocket, die, make a warrior, die, and then your 6 months are over and you can make another Sorcerer again.

Is 6 months too long?   Too short?   Is a change like this necessary?  Not necessary?  What do you think?

The idea of adding more restrictions to the karma system isn't overly appealing to me. However, if automated somehow, that could be convenient way of regulating the number of magic users.

It's a little bit odd that half the players I see in the gaj are gemmed (Is this just when I log on?) Although, part of it could be due to the temples being so close to the gaj.  Another contributor is probably that people are inclined to play the highest karma class they can, especially if they have not played it yet.  And of the twelve different karma required classes, nine of them are magickers. 

Would a gemmer only bar help with this?

Only having one gemmer friendly bar could increase the feel that the people of allanak are fearful/prejudice of magic. If the gemmer bar wasn't the gaj this would decrease the feel that everyone is a magicker -- the downside is it would spread the small player base more.  But using one of the current bars would decrease this a little.

[AmandaGreathouse]

The gemmer bar is the Gaj, though. It's also the rinthi, shitcloak, and other undesirables bar.

You don't see gemmed in Red's Retreat. Because it's socially above them.

I don't see adding a bar for the gemmed being of much help.

Although I do think that making Red's the starting location for Allanak as a possible solution. You have new players, and they're likely going to hang out in the bar that's the starting location for a while. Meh. I just don't see adding a bar for the gemmed as a good solution. Mostly because it would dilute the playerbase further. You can already see the prejudice against magickers by the fact that they 'are' generally only welcome at the shittiest bar in Allanak. Where you can see how putting a bar in for the gemmed would likely only inflame an already violent and rioting population, firstly, and secondly, there's already a place for gemmed to meet in the Quarter. Yeah it's not a bar, and yeah it's outside, but I don't think that adding a bar would add much to the game world besides further sequestering an already isolated role.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that there are so many gemmed in the Gaj. It's about the only establishment that will deal with them outside the quarter, and there's at least one gemmed mage npc in the bazaar as well, so I don't see it as the gemmed always being sequestered only in the Quarter when even the imm-written population reflects them as having a (small) presence outside of it.

[Salt Merchant]

You don't see gemmed in Red's Retreat. Because it's socially above them.

Not true. You do see them there from time to time.

[A Dry, Quiet War]

I mean, if you can full branch out a magicker in 100 hours of gameplay, and the rest of the mundane guilds take at least 500 hours of gameplay, doesn't that seem unfair?

Magickers are supposed to be scary, yes, but they aren't supposed to be game controlling characters via their skills and only their skills, and so quickly!  Magickers should have to make friends, in order to get more powerful.

In our game world, with permadeath and dangerous beasts and silly players, guilds are much more represented by their starting point than their stopping point.  If a five-day warrior can easily kill a five-day mage, magick isn't so scary anymore.

[AmandaGreathouse]

You don't see gemmed in Red's Retreat. Because it's socially above them.

Not true. You do see them there from time to time.

Emphasis mine.

Magickers are generally easily avoided, even in Allanak, if you aren't at the scumhole bar which they'd rightfully be at. Sure, I've had my share of mages go to Red's, but never, EVER to hang out downstairs in the bar. More like upstairs, out of general sight, for semi-private conversation.

I think it's fine the way it is now.

[RogueGunslinger]

I love the idea of making Reds the starting locations... Really love it.

[Winterless]

I don't see adding a bar for the gemmed being of much help.

Giving gemmers their own bar would be like giving them a viable station. Gemmers do not have a station, they are the lowest of the low, lower than rinthis and even half-elven scum, lower than a non-citizen. Forcing them to have to go to the dirtiest bar in town, read The Gaj, is fitting because it shows them what they will never acclimate to, even if that be a dirty elven rinther.

Sorry for the derail... Let's get this back to talking about a Karma System change.

[hyzhenhok]

I always thought the Gaj was a bit oddly placed. I've always thought Allanak's shady, dirty commoner bar should be a little further out of the way.

Given what the Gaj has gone through, it wouldn't be terribly strange for it finally to get destroyed and be replaced by a different establishment.

[RogueGunslinger]

Given what the Gaj has gone through, it wouldn't be terribly strange for it finally to get destroyed and be replaced by a different establishment.

I'd start a riot.


Not in game.

[Salt Merchant]

Giving gemmers their own bar would be like giving them a viable station. Gemmers do not have a station, they are the lowest of the low, lower than rinthis and even half-elven scum, lower than a non-citizen. Forcing them to have to go to the dirtiest bar in town, read The Gaj, is fitting because it shows them what they will never acclimate to, even if that be a dirty elven rinther.

Sorry for the derail... Let's get this back to talking about a Karma System change.

This seems too extreme to me.

Whatever else people think, gemmed are citizens by the direct mandate of the Highlord and possess all the privileges of a citizen. They're not lower than a non-citizen; the criminal system treats them better (jail instead of death for petty crimes), for instance.

[AreteX]

I don't know if a time limit is the right thing to do for people who have been given vast amounts of Karma, I do believe they have earned being able to play what they want, right?

I know it would be frustrating to make a Sorc/Psi, and die 3 hours into it, and not be able to make one for SIX MONTHS.  Thats a long time!  All that excitement of playing one of those, and boom, its gone.

I think that could really make alot of people frustrated and decide to not play for six months.  Know what I mean?

I really do enjoy the idea of being given 1-2 karma for account creation date.  For someone like myself who is quite nervous about their roleplayability, but I do think I do alright.  I follow documentation, play characters appropriately.  I don't really know the best way to branch skills ect, I don't spam them.  You know, I play the roles properly, persay.

But, I'm still shy.  I don't request an admin to watch me to try and obtain karma.  So, I am without.

It would be incredibly refreshing to be able to try out another karma level.  There are alot of concepts that seem very interesting, and intriguing.

Powerful, yes, but for someone like myself who really just loves the concept of Arm, would be played on a responsible level.

Good idea

[Xagon]

But, I'm still shy.  I don't request an admin to watch me to try and obtain karma.  So, I am without.

You can put a request in, a "karma review" so to speak. It's my understanding that staff will give out the first few points like candy, so long as you haven't done anything not to earn them.

As for the change, I'm not sure how I feel about it. I'm comfortable with my karma level, partly because I haven't exhausted all the character concepts I have in mind for what I have access to, but I wouldn't mind having access to a bit more.

I think the change shouldn't so much be with the karma system, but with special applications. Knowing that I only have three attempts in a year causes me to instinctively horde them until I come up with the perfect three concepts. Regarding access to karma classes, I think the limit on special applications should be opened up, but that they should remain capped if something other than an unaccessable class is wanted.

[AmandaGreathouse]

Regarding access to karma classes, I think the limit on special applications should be opened up, but that they should remain capped if something other than an unaccessable class is wanted.

This.

Also: If that were the case, I'd probably never, ever hit the cap.

[spawnloser]

Regarding access to karma classes, I think the limit on special applications should be opened up, but that they should remain capped if something other than an unaccessable class is wanted.

This.

Also: If that were the case, I'd probably never, ever hit the cap.

This is a good argument for not changing the special application process and/or limitations, if you ask me.

[spawnloser]

Take the Red's Retreat/Gemmer debate to the thread devoted specifically to that topic, please.  You can find it here:  http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,38170.msg524782.html#msg524782

[Old Kank]

Another contributor is probably that people are inclined to play the highest karma class they can, especially if they have not played it yet.  And of the twelve different karma required classes, nine of them are magickers. 

I think this is a much bigger factor than any of the power/branching/game mechanics that have previously been discussed.

Roughly 85% of my time on Arm has been devoted to human/dwarf/city elf warriors/rangers/assassins/merchants/pick-pockets.  I've played soldiers, mercenaries, hunters, raiders, thieves, tribals, guards, slaves, politicians and drifters.  After a while, playing any of the principle mundane roles started to feel repetitive, like I was just re-hashing one of previous characters with a new body/personality, so I moved on to karma roles and, special roles aside, I doubt I'll go back to mundane roles anytime soon.

It's only natural; as long as there are no mundane, non-restricted karma classes/races, people will continue to graduate into magickers and other restricted roles.

[Synthesis]

I have plenty of karma and I play mundane roles all the time.

Hell, even my magickers are mostly mundane.  A hillbilly with a nuclear warhead is still a hillbilly.

[Aaron Goulet]

Karma has historically played a role in determining someone's eligibility for roles that require a little more trust the "average" PC.  I think that using karma to determine who is eligible for in-game "perks" (aside from what your "non-average" PC starts with) gives karma players an in-character advantage over karma-less players with no in-character justification.

This is one of the reasons karma is considered an OOC concept rather than an IC concept, and crossing the line between the two is likely to invite a whole new set of headaches and (valid) complaints of unfairness.

[RogueGunslinger]

I believe Karma is flawed. It should be all or nothing. Why does a sorcerer require more trust to play than a krathi? I think you're either trusted enough to keep the documentation, and the best interest of the game in mind, or you're not. Why is someone trusted enough to play a Mul, not trusted enough to play a psion or sorc?

I believe this principle makes Karma seem like a sytem used not to show trust, but to give players a goal or let them set their sights on a sort of achievement. Obviously that's not the case, but it's the only real justification I can give.

[musashi]

It also helps to keep the populations of each guild in check somewhat. There are not supposed to be a disproportionate number of sorcerers in the game compared to warriors so having one guild be karma 0 and the other karma 8 helps to keep one rare and the other common I would think.

[Nyr]

I moved some "warehouse thread" posts on "karma" to this thread.

I believe Karma is flawed. It should be all or nothing. Why does a sorcerer require more trust to play than a krathi? I think you're either trusted enough to keep the documentation, and the best interest of the game in mind, or you're not. Why is someone trusted enough to play a Mul, not trusted enough to play a psion or sorc?

I believe this principle makes Karma seem like a sytem used not to show trust, but to give players a goal or let them set their sights on a sort of achievement. Obviously that's not the case, but it's the only real justification I can give.

In such a richly detailed playing environment as the world of Zalanthas, which is very different to most game settings most players will have encountered, there must be some degree of control over which players get to play which roles. The alternative (and this _has_ happened in the past) is that we have a lot of people going around playing races and guilds very badly (i.e., nowhere near what the game's creators intended). Karma is one way in which the staff members exercise this control.

Karma is simply a measure of trust that the staff members have in a given player's:

Degree of maturity and responsibility as a role-player, as evidenced by playing roles 'realistically.'
Knowledge of the game world, and an appreciation of the way in which the various races, guilds, and so on, interact.
Role-playing skill, as evidenced by role-playing in such a way as to show that they are really involved in the game world, and also enriching the game world for other players.

Karma is not an end in itself. Acquiring karma points is not something you should be 'striving towards' as a player; the fun that you get out of role-playing your character should be the primary reward in itself.

[Ashes]

Some stuff Nyr said.

Inspiring conviction by Gunslinger.

Some more stuff Nyr said.

Karma is simply a measure of trust that the staff members have in a given player's:

Degree of maturity and responsibility as a role-player, as evidenced by playing roles 'realistically.'
Knowledge of the game world, and an appreciation of the way in which the various races, guilds, and so on, interact.
Role-playing skill, as evidenced by role-playing in such a way as to show that they are really involved in the game world, and also enriching the game world for other players.

Karma is not an end in itself. Acquiring karma points is not something you should be 'striving towards' as a player; the fun that you get out of role-playing your character should be the primary reward in itself.

That really stands out to me as part of the karma mechanism.

[Akaramu]

Karma is not an end in itself. Acquiring karma points is not something you should be 'striving towards' as a player; the fun that you get out of role-playing your character should be the primary reward in itself.

I have to say, though, that since I have a considerable amount of karma I am overall enjoying my time logged into the game much more, for one important reason: I can, fairly often, play roles that don't need to rely on other players being logged in. My most convenient time for playing is severe offpeak with less than 20 players in the world. If I was stuck with mundane roles, I'd have to keep doing what killed my warrior/bard role for me... huge amounts of tavern idling, or messing up my sleep schedule by getting online at 4 AM my time.

In short: karma roles might be almost required for some offpeak players to get the most fun out of the game.

Please note I can't play rangers because I have no direction sense, neither IC nor OOC.  

[Lizzie]

I have to say, though, that since I have a considerable amount of karma I am overall enjoying my time logged into the game much more, for one important reason: I can, fairly often, play roles that don't need to rely on other players being logged in.

I just want to respond to that part.

I think you have the cause:effect backward. You have karma, BECAUSE you have proven that you can enjoy playing (responsibly) without relying on other players being logged in. It isn't that you do it because you have karma. It's that you have karma because you do it.

[Akaramu]

I don't agree, Lizzie. I got all except 1 of my karma playing social roles dependant on other PCs, and before I even started really getting into elaborate solo RP. My warrior bard, who earned some kama, did nothing except sit / idle in taverns or slack away in his hammock (mostly because there was no one to spar with for many ingame years). I even got emails from puzzled staff who noticed this, and wondered if I was having fun.  

[Nyr]

I was wondering if anyone would notice I just copied and pasted that from the website...

[musashi]

No one pays attention to you Nyr  

[Aaron Goulet]

I think that once people get over the "ooh, shiny" stage of having magicker karma, they're more inclined to broaden their role selections.  The next role I'm planning on playing is very much mundane.

[Lizzie]

Heh not me. I only play mundanes now, so the staff doesn't get pissed at me for constantly trying mages. I will keep trying mages til I get it right!

[AmandaGreathouse]

I've played a good bit of both. Sometimes you like one, sometimes you like another. And sometimes you want both.

[Akaramu]

I would totally love mundane roles if I could play different hours. They're still fun, sometimes, if I get lucky - like I did with a very active offpeak Byn back in 2004. But it's a lottery.

[janeshephard]

I think that once people get over the "ooh, shiny" stage of having magicker karma, they're more inclined to broaden their role selections.  The next role I'm planning on playing is very much mundane.

In my limited experience, all the sponsored roles, and karma roles are more difficult to play. I haven't played a sorcerer yet but I can imagine how difficult it must be when everything is out to get you and you start a nublet

[Agent_137]

i just want to point out that I gave up my magicker karma in the great karma off of '07 and still haven't asked for it back even though they said we could.

<--- hardcore

[FantasyWriter]

i just want to point out that I gave up my magicker karma in the great karma off of '07 and still haven't asked for it back even though they said we could.

<--- hardcore

But you don't play any more so that doesn't count.

[Agent_137]

it's not my fault Valve keeps making good games and that my current mundane is too badass to retire. Sigh. I just need to man-up and do it. The thrill of a challenge is often enough to make me play for a few months at least. maybe that's my problem, i ran out of challenge. ok back on topic:

I agree with Nyr, BUT the immortals need to learn to say NO to someone apping a role that there are too many of already, even if they have the karma for it. We had a big problem with this in the past (hence the great karma-off of '07) and I haven't played enough in awhile to notice if it's gotten better or worse.

Every karma app should be checked against the number in the world and the average amount of playtime those players are putting in on a weekly basis. The data is there it's just a matter of putting it together (which they may already have, and they may already do this. if so, good job imms you are great)

[spawnloser]

How do you know the data is easily mined?  Just because it is there doesn't mean that they have the means to extract the information in a usable fashion.

[Aaron Goulet]

How do you know the data is easily mined?  Just because it is there doesn't mean that they have the means to extract the information in a usable fashion.

I wonder if they could implement a command like this:

> tally guild sorcerer

195 sorcerers have been active within the past thirty days.

[Agent_137]

How do you know the data is easily mined?  Just because it is there doesn't mean that they have the means to extract the information in a usable fashion.

I didn't mean to say that it was easily mined. When i said, "it's just a matter of putting it together," i meant "the only work involved would be related to the data mining process or automation there-of."