Not so random Armageddon Thoughts about Guild sniffin'

[Armaddict]

You know, I dislike overt guild sniffing as much as the next...but it only really becomes a problem when there's something your hiding.  Overall, when playing leaders...it's pretty damn nice to know what you have available, what your underlings are capable of, and what you need to pick up in order for your goals to become viable, and for you to set your goals according to what's in reach.

[Aaron Goulet]

You know, I dislike overt guild sniffing as much as the next...but it only really becomes a problem when there's something your hiding.  Overall, when playing leaders...it's pretty damn nice to know what you have available, what your underlings are capable of, and what you need to pick up in order for your goals to become viable, and for you to set your goals according to what's in reach.

I feel it's a problem only because guilds are a purely OOC construct, and knowing OOCly that a PC isn't a merchant shouldn't doom him or her to IC suspicion or persecution.  I don't think there is anything wrong with a clan leader knowing what their personnel are capable of, but suspecting them of being a thief/assassin/elementalist/etc. because they don't know how to tan hides AND carve stone is, in no uncertain terms, an abuse of OOC information.

[Armaddict]

You know, I dislike overt guild sniffing as much as the next...but it only really becomes a problem when there's something your hiding.  Overall, when playing leaders...it's pretty damn nice to know what you have available, what your underlings are capable of, and what you need to pick up in order for your goals to become viable, and for you to set your goals according to what's in reach.

I feel it's a problem only because guilds are a purely OOC construct, and knowing OOCly that a PC isn't a merchant shouldn't doom him or her to IC suspicion or persecution.  I don't think there is anything wrong with a clan leader knowing what their personnel are capable of, but suspecting them of being a thief/assassin/elementalist/etc. because they don't know how to tan hides AND carve stone is, in no uncertain terms, an abuse of OOC information.

I think there should be a movement to generally agree that guild sniffing is okay to do, but using it as grounds for suspicion of the character is not okay to do.  In other words, use it for administrative purposes, but not IC purposes.

[Spice Spice Baby]

You know, I dislike overt guild sniffing as much as the next...but it only really becomes a problem when there's something your hiding.  Overall, when playing leaders...it's pretty damn nice to know what you have available, what your underlings are capable of, and what you need to pick up in order for your goals to become viable, and for you to set your goals according to what's in reach.

I feel it's a problem only because guilds are a purely OOC construct, and knowing OOCly that a PC isn't a merchant shouldn't doom him or her to IC suspicion or persecution.  I don't think there is anything wrong with a clan leader knowing what their personnel are capable of, but suspecting them of being a thief/assassin/elementalist/etc. because they don't know how to tan hides AND carve stone is, in no uncertain terms, an abuse of OOC information.

I think there should be a movement to generally agree that guild sniffing is okay to do, but using it as grounds for suspicion of the character is not okay to do.  In other words, use it for administrative purposes, but not IC purposes.

It also sucks to be on the opposite side, as a minion, and constantly get assignments from your boss that you can't actually accomplish. I had a PC hired into a merchant house a couple years back who kept getting assigned crafting projects despite having no crafting skills. 

A few long agafari planks are here, sorta stacked into a table.

[WagonsHo]

As a leader, what frustrates me is that my non-suited-for-the-role hires always vanish before I can make use of their actual skill set.  If you're going to go through the whole process of getting clanned and hired to do something that you can't codedly do, please stick around long enough (a few RL days, at least) for me to use or at least interact with your character's actual skills and abilities.  I don't want to be a guild sniffer, but I've yet to have a non-traditional hire stick around and not just be a psychotic mess.  Leaders need to be sure to be open minded, but players need to make sure to offer some positive reinforcement to leaders who take risks on them.  I've yet to be rewarded ICly or OOCly for a risky or unusual hire.  That doesn't make me the player OR my character excited to spend the time interviewing you, getting you gear, teaching you the rules, showing you around, etc., with the knowledge that you're just going to be unhappy and store or wander into the silt because you tired of your wacky concept in a day.

[Marauder Moe]

The problem with guild-sniffing isn't when you reject someone who isn't qualified to do a job.

The problem is when you realize they can't fight and can't craft and then you assume that (because the remaining options are pickpocket, burglar, magicker, and worse) said character is up to no good.

Not every socialite character chooses guild_merchant.

Not every pickpocket/burglar character steals stuff.

As for magickers, if they're looking for a job in a non-magick-friendly (non-Tuluki) clan, it means they intend to stick around long enough for their coming-out-of-the-magick-closet plot to be fun and dramatic.

[netflix]

Personally, I think guild sniffing can be completely warrented. I've certainly done it. Certain jobs require certain skills. And certain coded guilds were designed with certain jobs in mind. I often see people complaining on here, for example, about people sniffing out rangers for hunting jobs. Well, the truth of the matter is that the best hunters -are- rangers. It's what rangers were designed for. Of course many other guilds -can- hunt, but never as good as a ranger. The ranger will always be better in certain areas, and will be able to do certain things that subguilds can't make up for. It's no different then wanting a merchant for a crafter job, or wanting a Viv as a squad healer. Especially if you're only allowed to hire X number of people. Gotta make those slots count.

This said, I've also tried to give a -little- leway when I'd been involved in such things. If I had a position I'm in charge of that I could hire as many as 3 people for, a position that warrented guild sniffing, I would uually allow one less-than-optimal guild in, so long as I had optimal guilds for the other role.

In the end, think of it like this. It's no different then RL. A persons resume goes a very long way. The qualified person is usually gonna get hired over the underqualified person.

And yes, I agree, guild sniffing for other reasons is (usually) silly, and is (often, but not always) counterproductive. 

[spawnloser]

I am always amazed out how quickly minions disappear/die.  Is it seriously that hard to survive a couple of RL months, even if you are breaking the rules?

Sometimes it is, actually.

Especially if you're only allowed to hire X number of people. Gotta make those slots count.

What is with people's problems with this lately?  IT'S AN ILLUSION!!!  Hire everyone you want to hire.  If the staff see a problem, they will tell you.  If they give you a limit and someone else comes along you want to hire, talk to the staff and give your reasons for why you should be allowed to bring another PC into the clan.  Is it because this person can't craft everything you need and this new one will get the rest?  Is it because this person can't log on enough so you need that person too?  Stop bitching about how many people you're allowed to hire and worry about why you're hiring the people and the staff will understand, be flexible and work with you.  Get over it.

[brytta.leofa]

Personally, I think guild sniffing can be completely warrented. I've certainly done it. Certain jobs require certain skills. And certain coded guilds were designed with certain jobs in mind.

I'm sympathetic to the fact that you have actual stuff that needs done, sir.  But you overestimate how Absolutely Perfect each guild is.  A ranger is far from the ideal hunter until he has a lot of experience.  The bloke with a crafting subguild may be perfectly adequate for much of your manufacturing work, and have much to offer you on the side.  (If you're playing, say, a GMH role perfectly straight, i.e. with rangers and merchants and no dirty tricks division, well...heeh.)

You also underestimate the damage done to Armageddon when leaders start playing it like Toon World.

[Aaron Goulet]

Personally, I think guild sniffing can be completely warrented. I've certainly done it. Certain jobs require certain skills. And certain coded guilds were designed with certain jobs in mind. I often see people complaining on here, for example, about people sniffing out rangers for hunting jobs. Well, the truth of the matter is that the best hunters -are- rangers. It's what rangers were designed for. Of course many other guilds -can- hunt, but never as good as a ranger. The ranger will always be better in certain areas, and will be able to do certain things that subguilds can't make up for. It's no different then wanting a merchant for a crafter job, or wanting a Viv as a squad healer. Especially if you're only allowed to hire X number of people. Gotta make those slots count.

This said, I've also tried to give a -little- leway when I'd been involved in such things. If I had a position I'm in charge of that I could hire as many as 3 people for, a position that warrented guild sniffing, I would uually allow one less-than-optimal guild in, so long as I had optimal guilds for the other role.

In the end, think of it like this. It's no different then RL. A persons resume goes a very long way. The qualified person is usually gonna get hired over the underqualified person.

I think the issue, again, lies with using an OOC construct (guilds), in an IC context.  There are maybe a few people who refer to themselves as rangers in-game, but for the most part, people are laborers/grebbers/beggars/hunters/soldiers/artisans/merchants/aides/whores/etc.

Determining someone's in-game qualifications shouldn't involve guild sniffing in the traditional sense of the word...  A simple test of skill, or supervision during a character's probationary period, should suffice in telling you whether or not they can do the job asked of them.  If they can't deliver?  Fire them.



Overall though, I, personally, don't have as much of a problem with people guild sniffing for hiring purposes as I do guild sniffing for discrimination/incarceration/execution... Then you're simply taking it too far and abusing OOC knowledge.

And yes, I agree, guild sniffing for other reasons is (usually) silly, and is (often, but not always) counterproductive. 

Which I'm glad we can agree on.   Honestly, I would be seriously surprised if anyone came out and said (without a trace of sarcasm) that it's perfectly okay to do.

[Reiloth]

Personally, I think guild sniffing can be completely warrented. I've certainly done it. Certain jobs require certain skills. And certain coded guilds were designed with certain jobs in mind.

I'm sympathetic to the fact that you have actual stuff that needs done, sir.  But you overestimate how Absolutely Perfect each guild is.  A ranger is far from the ideal hunter until he has a lot of experience.  The bloke with a crafting subguild may be perfectly adequate for much of your manufacturing work, and have much to offer you on the side.  (If you're playing, say, a GMH role perfectly straight, i.e. with rangers and merchants and no dirty tricks division, well...heeh.)

You also underestimate the damage done to Armageddon when leaders start playing it like Toon World.

Quite true, my friend. Treat the PC's like people, and you'll find guilds don't matter much.

[flurry]

I think there's a difference between a recruiter sniffing for the job-appropriate capabilities, and sniffing to determine the precise guild. It certainly feels different on the side of the interviewee, and I know I've been in situations where the person hiring was pointedly trying to figure out exactly what guild (and perhaps even subguild) my character was. In some cases maybe that's excusable, but I don't like it.

The fact that there are these distinct guilds and each character (apart from special apps) belongs to one of them is a purely OOC construct. So I don't think there's any reason to have characters have an awareness that PCs can be OOCly divided into distinct categories with only rare shades of gray in between.

[flurry]

Especially if you're only allowed to hire X number of people. Gotta make those slots count.

What is with people's problems with this lately?  IT'S AN ILLUSION!!!  Hire everyone you want to hire.  If the staff see a problem, they will tell you.  If they give you a limit and someone else comes along you want to hire, talk to the staff and give your reasons for why you should be allowed to bring another PC into the clan.  Is it because this person can't craft everything you need and this new one will get the rest?  Is it because this person can't log on enough so you need that person too?  Stop bitching about how many people you're allowed to hire and worry about why you're hiring the people and the staff will understand, be flexible and work with you.  Get over it.

I guess the emails I got from clan staff were an illusion too.

[X-D]

I think people getting all snotty about "guild sniffing" is rather funny.

IRL if you have a position open that calls for somebody with deep knowledge of a nuclear reactor, your not going to hire the guy whos skillset is acting and baking cookies.

In game is the same thing. If I need somebody to guard my soft merchant ass, I'm not going to hire somebody who specializes in breaking into apartments.

If I need 20 tandu hides a day, I'm not going to hire people who cannot skin like a pro, I don't care how well they kill things.

ETC ETC. "guild sniffing" by leader types is totally IC and realistic, and guilds are as well.

[Dan]

The one dude says, "Hey so uh, are you good in the desert?"

The templar says, "Are you seriously trying to guild sniff -me-?"

[brytta.leofa]

In game is the same thing. If I need somebody to guard my soft merchant ass, I'm not going to hire somebody who specializes in breaking into apartments.

This would be a much more credible argument if clans refused to hire inexperienced workers.

[Samira]

In game is the same thing. If I need somebody to guard my soft merchant ass, I'm not going to hire somebody who specializes in breaking into apartments.

This would be a much more credible argument if clans refused to hire inexperienced workers.

Yeah.  But seriously, does anyone actually attempt to make a distinction between, for example, "general crafters" and "specialized crafters" when announcing that they will hire people with little to no experience?  Because that would make no sense ICly.

[netflix]

Stop bitching about how many people you're allowed to hire and worry about why you're hiring the people and the staff will understand, be flexible and work with you.  Get over it.

Sometime I wonder if you do anything on these forums but troll. But thanks for the reminder of why I usually keep away from the public forums.

Back on topic, there are many factors that go into how many PCs a clan can handle, and staff suggestions/restrictions are only a part of that. For example, not all clans are set up with unlimited (or even limited) supplies of food and water. And if the staff says that it's intentional, then resources can be an issue. In clans with different types of jobs, where one area depends on another, balance is very important. For example, having ten crafters and only one hunter can lead to some very bored crafters. And lastly, and perhaps most importantly, to me at least, is that after awhile, a clan can just get too large and unmanageable. To the point it loses that close knit group feel. Which to me is the #1 draw of clan life. And something that I always try to promote.

In the end, a clan is a clan. There is know blanket answer. There's so many factors, from situation, to current staff, to the current PC leadership, that flavor, from accent to overhaul, how a clan is and operates.

[brytta.leofa]

I think it is wrong to let your character have any notion of what the correlations between skills are.

If you need someone who can shoot, skin, and ride, hire people who say they can shoot, skin, and ride (and test them to make sure they can).  Not folks who say that they want to learn; not folks who proudly announce that "I'm a ranger!"

[netflix]

You also underestimate the damage done to Armageddon when leaders start playing it like Toon World.

Quite true, my friend. Treat the PC's like people, and you'll find guilds don't matter much.

This goes both ways. PCs need to -act- like people. If you're not properly qualified for a job, don't apply for it. If your college education is environmental engineering, don't go apply for an electrical engineering job, just because they both involve "engineering". If I've spent all my life fixing cars, and nothing but fixing cars, and I show up at an interview for a CFO position at a brokerage house, I'm not gonna get upset if I'm not taken seriously and not hired. As long as qualifications desired for a job are valid, and it so happens that only one coded guild meets all of those qualifications, and if the PC leader doing the hiring deems that's the way they want to go, then hey, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. If your warrior/nomads, or burglar/archers or ranger/hunters aren't getting hired for that Salarr hunting job that you really want, cause the boss is guild hunting for a ranger, well then, I suggest, for your next character, you make a ranger.

And a phrase like "treat PCs like people and you'll find the guilds don't matter much" really, doesn't make sense, in a game that is strongly based around skills and coded ability. Not entirely, certainly, we are an RPO. But we also aren't a MUSH that has no coded skill sets. We aren't even a game like SoI or HL that have pick-your-own-skills characters. We're a mud that has classes. Those classes have set skills. And some classes are more suited to some things then other classes are. If at some point the the staff decide to change around the game and make it classless, so that any PC can have the skills they chose, and that skill caps are equal (or dictated by stats), and this and that, well then, the game becomes a much different place. And all of this discussion becomes moot. Until thien, coded classes are simply a fact of Armageddon life, that we all have to live with and work with and manage as best we can.

Yeah.  But seriously, does anyone actually attempt to make a distinction between, for example, "general crafters" and "specialized crafters" when announcing that they will hire people with little to no experience?  Because that would make no sense ICly.

Because there is no simple, or sometimes not even possible, way to learn skills outside of your guild's skill tree, a certain degree of metagaming is sometimes required, and valid. The game is full of metagaming. People who start the game as grizzled mercenaries, yet their skills show them as someone who would die to a tregil. Or someone who needs to go away from the game for a couple of weeks, when their IC excuses is that they went to visit their monther in Tuluk, yet, codedly, the character never left Red Storm. Or how the cost of stabling and feeding a beetle for an hour is the same as for 70 years. Or the very fact that your beetles are still in the stables after 70 years. Metagaming is convenient and forgotten when it doesn't hinder a person. But it's often railed against the moment it makes things even slightly inconvenient for a person.

[brytta.leofa]

If you're not properly qualified for a job, don't apply for it.

This is pretty much the only thing you just said that I agree with, but on this point I do agree heartily.

Because there is no simple, or sometimes not even possible, way to learn skills outside of your guild's skill tree, a certain degree of metagaming is sometimes required, and valid.

No.  That's not a particularly smart way to play even if you're a slimy powergamer, and it's sure as heck not good roleplay.

[netflix]

Because there is no simple, or sometimes not even possible, way to learn skills outside of your guild's skill tree, a certain degree of metagaming is sometimes required, and valid.

No.  That's not a particularly smart way to play even if you're a slimy powergamer, and it's sure as heck not good roleplay.

Let me ask you this. Have you ever, once, when dealing with anyone in game, used a phrase akin to "this time next week" to refer to a point roughly 1 RL day later? If so, that's metagaming.

[Synthesis]

[brytta.leofa]

We should like get our own thread for this or something.

[netflix]

Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself. In simple terms, using out-of-game information, or resources, to affect one's in-game decisions.