A Modest Proposal Regarding OOC Coordination

[Titania]

For every karma point you have, they should allow you to recruit that many non family member characters for a concept. I think the family only rules just kill a lot of cool ideas. Also spec app for more people.

[Marshmellow]

For every karma point you have, they should allow you to recruit that many non family member characters for a concept. I think the family only rules just kill a lot of cool ideas. Also spec app for more people.

I don't think there's any point where someone should get a leg up in game because they have OOC friends.  Please, no.

[Synthesis]

For every karma point you have, they should allow you to recruit that many non family member characters for a concept. I think the family only rules just kill a lot of cool ideas. Also spec app for more people.

I don't think there's any point where someone should get a leg up in game because they have OOC friends.  Please, no.

On the flip-side, knowing someone OOCly makes it much easier to PK them, because they'll haplessly go places and do things with you that anyone else would be highly wary of.  They'll also do things like "via IM: dude, I'm gonna go walk my dogs for a bit, don't let anyone kill me."  BACKSTAB.  This usually only works once, but if you contact someone you know ICly to do the actual killing, and make it look like you tried to stop it, you could probably get away with it a few times before they catch on.   

Why did everyone just de-friend me? Guys? I was kidding! Look, it's a SMILEY.

[Titania]

For every karma point you have, they should allow you to recruit that many non family member characters for a concept. I think the family only rules just kill a lot of cool ideas. Also spec app for more people.

I don't think there's any point where someone should get a leg up in game because they have OOC friends.  Please, no.

So you are against the karma system?

If it were limited to mundanes, then it would be pretty tame. Much less abusive than what karma now buys you. I just find it stupid that everyone comes into the world friendless. What makes more sense that Bob has two friends or that he controls one of the fundamental forces of the universe with magic or is half giant and semi retarded. Not having two friends! (Apparantly)

[Marauder Moe]

My characters sometimes come into the world with friends.  They hang out together while I'm at work.

[Zoltan]

For every karma point you have, they should allow you to recruit that many non family member characters for a concept. I think the family only rules just kill a lot of cool ideas. Also spec app for more people.

I don't think there's any point where someone should get a leg up in game because they have OOC friends.  Please, no.

So you are against the karma system?

If it were limited to mundanes, then it would be pretty tame. Much less abusive than what karma now buys you. I just find it stupid that everyone comes into the world friendless. What makes more sense that Bob has two friends or that he controls one of the fundamental forces of the universe with magic or is half giant and semi retarded. Not having two friends! (Apparantly)

Networks of OOCly arranged relationships do more damage to the gameworld and are harder to detect and correct than the twinkiest of mages. Such networking is a pet peeve of mine, but I'm probably not going to be able to give you a satisfactory reason as to why I think they're a Bad Thing. The current family-apping system is a good compromise on the matter, I think, because the staff can easily review it all and players can still have that extra bit of depth in their character creation.

Whoa, I just looked at the thread title and this is a major derail. Er, on topic... Actually, I can't think of anything. 

My characters sometimes come into the world with friends.  They hang out together while I'm at work.

Heh, there you go. That's how some of my background things tend to work out. Not every character grew up in UTTER ISOLATION before spawning in the Gaj. An elegant way of Keeping It Real ICly.

[Titania]

Make them follow the same rules as the family process for all I care. I am not saying they are friends, just that they accept applications for a few roles for a concept initially. The people in charge would have karma and it'd be staff approved. Whatever, I amtired of the bland no conflict stagnant situation. Bring on the murderous gang of buddy warriors or, it would be *Gasp* fun and entertaining. Keep your imaginary RP integrety and bring on some action.

[Marauder Moe]

I think the idea is that the murderous gang of buddy warriors should be formed in-character and in-game.

[Zoltan]

A murderous gang of buddy warriors can be formed IG, through strictly IC means, and it has been done before. If people want more violent action, they need to make it happen. Sometimes negotiation and cooperation make -much- more sense to a character, however.

And Moe basically beat me to it.

[Akaramu]

The one situation I can think of where this would make sense, outside of a family group, is for a pimp with several whores. Sure, whores can be recruited IC - in theory. But if no one happens to play them at the time, the concept is doomed to fail.

Actually, I can think of another... a theatre or musical group. Actors and musicians are not played that often, singers / dancers are more common by far.

I would not necessarily see them as buddies... a whore could be plotting to kill her pimp, the musicians might not get along and struggle with splitup arguments, just like many RL bands do.

[Marauder Moe]

I've seen at least one successful pimp.

I haven't seen theater groups, but it seems like it'd be a reasonable thing in Tuluk at least.


Character's don't necessarily have to start out as whores and actors to become such, though.  You just have to find some that are willing to do the deed and figure out how to make it profitable for them to do so (and preferably you as well).

[Nyr]

We're definitely not going to do that. 

Please stay on topic:  this is about race questions, not OOC coordination.

[Titania]

More status quo. Enjoy?

[Nyr]

Here, it is now in its own thread.

If you'd like, I can provide a lengthier response to your idea, but it doesn't seem as though you're open to anything but capitulation and a change.

edit to add:  if you do want to discuss it though I'm more than happy to participate.  I gathered that from things like "more status quo, enjoy" and "keep your imaginary RP integrity," "bring on some action," and "bland no conflict stagnant situation," you were either operating under assumptions that aren't true, or have a very strong opinion that you do not want to have changed.

[HavokBlue]

I see why staff are opposed to this idea, on one hand, but on the other, it opens up a lot of possibilities for role ideas. On top of that, I think people who want to network things OOCly where they shouldn't be will do/do it anyway.

[Titania]

Here, it is now in its own thread.

If you'd like, I can provide a lengthier response to your idea, but it doesn't seem as though you're open to anything but capitulation and a change.

edit to add:  if you do want to discuss it though I'm more than happy to participate.  I gathered that from things like "more status quo, enjoy" and "keep your imaginary RP integrity," "bring on some action," and "bland no conflict stagnant situation," you were either operating under assumptions that aren't true, or have a very strong opinion that you do not want to have changed.

I believe having opinion that will not change regardless of evidence (other than yes men's) is more Staff's job. You are the snarkiest poster on the GDB also. As soon as I have looked up the karma chart I will indeed continue discussion.

[valeria]

Just because people can and do do it anyway doesn't necessarily mean that it should be supported.

One of the reasons I really enjoy playing Arm is because of the relative lack of OOC coordination.  I've played on MUDs that either openly allow or don't discourage OOC coordination for players and roles, and from what I've seen, it leads to cliquishness.

[Maziel]

I believe having opinion that will not change regardless of evidence (other than yes men's) is more Staff's job. You are the snarkiest poster on the GDB also. As soon as I have looked up the karma chart I will indeed continue discussion.

Edit: I take it back, I don't think I know where you're coming from.

Calm down!

I think I can kind of see where you're coming from, but I also feel like I must be missing something.

If you're in a position where you know someone well who plays Armageddon, it wouldn't surprise me if this came up in a conversation, "We should totally meet up and do x kind of stuff together! We'd be the most badass x doers ever!" This is especially true if you introduced someone into the game, or were the one introduced. It's far simpler to at least mention that you know each other in your backgrounds instead of trying to come up with why the two of you are going to x together.  Otherwise, the OOC friendship makes the IC skepticism both characters would be feeling hard to roleplay correctly. Plus, if you enjoy talking about the game a lot with them, then it's a lot simpler if your characters know the same things. That way accidentally giving away sensitive IC information isn't really an issue. I've really only this with my older brother, which strangely seems to be happening less now that we're living together, and it seems to work out okay.

However, there was an instance where I tried getting both of my brothers to play with me at my moms house. Everyone but my little brother got killed by raptor's. He didn't even seem to enjoy the game too much and hasn't played since.   Maybe killing us was a staff's way of saying grouping the way we were isn't okay. Or maybe they were just trying to provide us with entertainment and we simply sucked. Probably the latter.

I'm completely against having a large group of warriors getting together before they get in game, though. I can see this to leading to a bunch of OOC clique's.

[Titania]

I am not advocating that the people recruited for a role hare any OOC communication other than the initial approval process.
The talk of OOC coordination and your hatred of it really rings hollow, as every coded clan does it. I am not proposing that anyway. I just don't see why every group is always of a family and why the INITIAL STAFF APPROVED coordination is so difficult.

This would be coordinated by people with karma, who the staff trusts to a degree?

So you say to be the change. Well i would  have to store or suicide. Then I enter the game as a helpless nobody, having to wait on random luck and chance to "be the change". Maye you all enjoy the slow process to becoming a slight danger to anyone of consequence, but I don't. IF I have karma I don't see why I should have to enter the world perpetually as a helpless nobody. Allow a few more options and I think the excitement and roles would be greatly enhanced.

Jut crude idea of the top of my head.

Levels of karma:
Number  Options
1 karma  desert elf, moderate skillset for a mundane
2 karma  water and stone elementalist, advanced skillset for a mundane
3 karma  half giant, recruit 1 person with staff approval
4 karma  wind and fire elementalist, recruit 2
5 karma  lightning and shadow elementalist, recruit 3
6 karma  void elementalist, recruit 4
7 karma  mul, shop, bodyguard
8 karma  psi and sorcerer, wagon



As for my opinion on stagnation? Where is any conflict that is anything but petty squabbling? Everyone says to be the change, but if you do anything to break up the hand holding festival, you'll get slapped down from on high. Maybe if players had groups that the Houses could target, it would liven things up.

[Cutthroat]

Your idea as proposed would be a drain upon activity in the game. Imagine if one eight-karma player decides to start his own pseudo-clan with his buddies right from Day 0. Or imagine if eight one karma players separately decide to take one non-family character each as buddies from the start. There would be fewer alliances created in-game; even less of a desire to join clans when the reasons for doing so are already thin; and isolation would grow.

I understand where you're coming from. I just don't think the idea is well thought-out. OOC coordination is an issue people try to treat carefully, yes, but the practicality of the idea will just continue to tip the scales in favor of singular PCs and tiny groups. Anyone that wants areawide or worldwide plots would not find this idea to be a minor inconvenience. They would be utterly shafted.

You're not perpetually a helpless nobody. There are more ways to be the change, than taking power through coded means. There are more ways to enter or create a group than to do so right from the start. There are clans, and there are independent groups that crop up from time to time, all of the time. If you're looking for conflict, it's in these groups and amongst them. You just may not be privy to it. Have some patience or look elsewhere, and you'll see it eventually.

[HavokBlue]

As for my opinion on stagnation? Where is any conflict that is anything but petty squabbling? Everyone says to be the change, but if you do anything to break up the hand holding festival, you'll get slapped down from on high. Maybe if players had groups that the Houses could target, it would liven things up.

I can tell you from experience that it is entirely possible to create conflict beyond petty squabbling without getting wrist-slapped, but that isn't really what this topic is about, I think.

[Drayab]

If you couldn't OOCly recruit family members, then you'd never see PC brothers and sisters, only cousins among the people who took a role like a noble house family member. If you want PC families as a possibility, then it pretty much has to be this way.

There's nothing stopping you from forming a band of murderous thugs except for the fact that templar and militia PCs love a chance to catch a crook. I think you should give more thought to how to stay undetected while you build your nefarious organization, and less thought to how you can get it set up OOCly so you can bust out on the scene with your posse already behind you. You're right; it's not easy, but with great challenge comes great reward if you pull it off.

[Titania]

I guess I don't care if the houses never got another PC. They are all tied into each other so much it is boring
To me I'd rather see something new. If some new group popped up my first thought would be to be curious not piss myself wondering how they are going to cheat or affect the stale and mighty houses.

Another issue is time. I cant play enough to organize something organically. So because of this ooc thing another idea is crushed.

If you say how bad it would make things I propose it can hardly get worse. I am not interested in restriction I am in seeing peoplehave a chance to try things and have fun. That seems like the thing no one cares about

[Drayab]

One of the things I like about Armageddon is that I agree with the administration's policies regarding meta-gaming, which is to say, they do their best to limit it. Success in the game should not be dependent on your ability to form a group in OOC circles. I like the way that everybody starts out on basically equal footing whether you are a noob or you have been playing for ten years. It is a common complaint among veterans that 'the grind' really gets old when you are rolling up warrior #22, but I think it is a necessary evil. I also understand your frustrations with RL time constraints. Personally, I have to avoid leadership positions entirely because I do not have the time to invest to do it right. That said, when you start giving out perks like stat/skill boosts, wagons, shops and minions based on karma level, you are creating an underclass of players that feel unappreciated when they don't get karma, and they keep seeing these new characters entering the world with the same level of skills and goodies they've been developing over the past 3 rl months. In fact, if it were set up like this, people without karma might decide there is no point to even trying to form a band of murderous thugs, because some high karma player is just going to get it all set up over AIM and roll in with their posse next week. They would bust onto the scene with force, and yet they would have no connections to long lived PCs or plots that have been going on for a while. Karma already gives access to astonishing power, but it is well balanced by social restrictions and roleplay expectations. I do not want to see karma becoming increasingly important to one's success, as measured by your character's accomplishments IG.

[Cutthroat]

I guess I don't care if the houses never got another PC. They are all tied into each other so much it is boring
To me I'd rather see something new. If some new group popped up my first thought would be to be curious not piss myself wondering how they are going to cheat or affect the stale and mighty houses.

Another issue is time. I cant play enough to organize something organically. So because of this ooc thing another idea is crushed.

If you say how bad it would make things I propose it can hardly get worse. I am not interested in restriction I am in seeing peoplehave a chance to try things and have fun. That seems like the tvarhing no one cares about

What I don't understand exactly is how you can't do this with the rules that are already in place. If you want to make a group of hunters, for example, that's fine. Get three family members the usual way and recruit hunters in game. The family could lead the group, while the rest are "employees" or whatever else you could imagine. But you're never going to have everything set up for you, whether you're playing a few hours a day or a few hours a week. And while I feel for the plight of the casual player, I've never had trouble participating in plots on either side of the fence. It takes effort no matter how much time you have, or what you choose to do with it.

The "stale and mighty" Houses of which you speak have lots of virtual power. I don't think that you would see a small group of people easily affecting one negatively, from the start of the group's creation. Yes, it takes work. What my argument was primarily about was that the clans (Houses, tribes, the Byn, militias, etc) would be even more underrepresented than they are now, if there are even more groups (player-created groups) to join.

Also, don't make the mistake of conflating disagreement with not caring about fun. I personally think that if we see more PCs split into more groups with varying amounts of power from the beginning that it won't be fun, but I find the current way of things fun enough. You seem to think the opposite, but that's fine too.

[Synthesis]

Personally, I find that actually roleplaying with people you know OOCly is a bit like moving in with a girlfriend who you know isn't long-term relationship material.  I mean, sure, there's a lot of, "Haha, wouldn't it be funny if we did <x, y, or z>? We would own all!" but when it comes down to it, I kind of consciously avoid it, because Zalanthas is a really nasty fucking place, and sometimes shit that a man's gotta do IC is the kind of stuff that would get a motherfucker real friendless, real quick in real life.  It's much easier to be a cold-hearted douche when you're operating on the assumption that your target is just some fuckin' noob.

[Reiteration]

I like the first idea, I want to be one of the nine undead sorcerer minions.

[Nyr]

I believe having opinion that will not change regardless of evidence (other than yes men's) is more Staff's job. You are the snarkiest poster on the GDB also. As soon as I have looked up the karma chart I will indeed continue discussion.

I can understand why you'd have the sentiment about me being the snarkiest poster on the GDB.  As a person used to potluck and food (mmm, food!), I am happy to pass around whatever is given to me.  When you start out with this position, after having derailed a thread to air out your grievance with something unrelated:

Whatever, I amtired of the bland no conflict stagnant situation. Bring on the murderous gang of buddy warriors or, it would be *Gasp* fun and entertaining. Keep your imaginary RP integrety and bring on some action.

and then this:

More status quo. Enjoy?

I take it that a certain amount of snark has been doled out, and a certain amount should be passed back to the sender.  Sometimes, a bit of snark gets a point across. 
As for your first point, staff do change their opinions on things, and we do change policy--but we generally don't change policy towards less-restrictive ideals on metagaming.  I'll get back to that in a sec.

I am not advocating that the people recruited for a role hare any OOC communication other than the initial approval process.
The talk of OOC coordination and your hatred of it really rings hollow, as every coded clan does it. I am not proposing that anyway. I just don't see why every group is always of a family and why the INITIAL STAFF APPROVED coordination is so difficult.

This would be coordinated by people with karma, who the staff trusts to a degree?

I understand this concept.  Your argument for it, however, is just "it's not this way, so it should be," with "and we can use karma to trust people to do it."  The "it" in this case:  letting people play together in an OOCly created group from the start.  You're describing the Klestions without family ties, which is worse than the Klestions, since they can (I assume) also recruit in-game.

So you say to be the change. Well i would  have to store or suicide. Then I enter the game as a helpless nobody, having to wait on random luck and chance to "be the change". Maye you all enjoy the slow process to becoming a slight danger to anyone of consequence, but I don't.

Yes; no one is suggesting anything other than the way things are presently, though random luck and chance have little to do with roleplaying your way into leadership.

As for my opinion on stagnation? Where is any conflict that is anything but petty squabbling?

In the game.  You'd have to find out IC.  You wouldn't have to look very far. 

Everyone says to be the change, but if you do anything to break up the hand holding festival, you'll get slapped down from on high.

You won't.  What you say is open-ended and nonspecific, though.

Maybe if players had groups that the Houses could target, it would liven things up.

They have and they have been targeted in the past, too. 

If some new group popped up my first thought would be to be curious not piss myself wondering how they are going to cheat or affect the stale and mighty houses.

That's not our thought either, though it would be our first thought if a new group popped up entirely inhabited by players that coordinated the role OOCly in advance, even with this proposed system. 

If you say how bad it would make things I propose it can hardly get worse. I am not interested in restriction I am in seeing peoplehave a chance to try things and have fun. That seems like the thing no one cares about

It can get worse. 

To address the rest of the last quote (and to go back to metagaming):

We don't have policies on things to prevent people from having fun.  Over time, we've learned things, and we restrict some things because experience has taught us that these restrictions are better and allow more people to have fun without getting screwed over by someone that metagames our system.  Sure, players still try to coordinate things OOCly and against the spirit and policies of the game, but we're not going to say "you know what?  They're going to do it anyway, so let's just remove these restrictions and any punishments on violating them." 

We have a better game because of these restrictions.

[Titania]

I don't understand why a good role has to take so long and be such a grueling experience? You built yourself up from nothing and you have to do it every time? I would think that starts to get old after a while?

I really don't see how having a little flexibility and trust in the players would cause an apocalypse. But if everyone wants to stick their neck under the staff's jackboots and thank them for it, so be it.


Nyr you are snarky period. Do not pretend that anyone provokes you. If you were not a member of the staff I am confident you would be banned from the gdb.

[Maziel]

I don't understand why a good role has to take so long and be such a grueling experience? You built yourself up from nothing and you have to do it every time? I would think that starts to get old after a while?

It makes it meaningful when you get somewhere. What is a reward without effort?

[X-D]

That is actually one of the problems, considering it reward.

I actually agree with the OP on that one point. Other RPI have it so you can start with a PC with advanced skills if you wish to spend the "karma" for it.

Myself, I have been over any type of enjoyment of "the grind" For around 8 years. I freely admit that I skill my PCs up as fast as codedly possible so I can move along to the important stuff, Roleplaying with you all, plotting etc.

I know I can take any PC and move it from zero to uber in an amount of time that is silly low, And of course get yelled at by staff for doing something that I feel I really should not have to do any more...go figure.

But anyway, here is my idea on that note.

Have it so somebody can start with a skill advanced PC, but they actually have to SPEND the karma for it. As in, Hey, you want a human warrior starting with all skills at least JM, fine, you lose 2 karma..better hope he lasts a while.

[Cutthroat]

I really don't see how having a little flexibility and trust in the players would cause an apocalypse. But if everyone wants to stick their neck under the staff's jackboots and thank them for it, so be it.

No one here is saying that your idea would break the game, and no one here is thanking staff for any oppressive game rules. The fact of the matter is that your idea is unpopular, so stop attacking those who disagree and instead put something forward against the counterarguments they proposed.

Did you see my last post? You could start up a group around a family if you're willing to do IC recruiting for employees of the family. No rules are stopping you from doing so, in fact. Would you tell me how that isn't a fair compromise between what you're asking for and what already exists?

Do you realize that there are some shops, wagons, and other constructions that players and their PCs have worked for, and eventually received... and that those players would be slighted if someone with high enough karma was able to gain these special things from the start?

Or that the idea of a character starting with increased skills has been proposed several times, and that it was decided that special apps are the fairest way to dole out bonuses on a case by case basis?

If there's anything that this game, and those similar to it, depend on its players having, it's the understanding that some semblance of delayed gratification needs to be practiced. No one starts off with everything they need to be successful, not even nobles and templars. It takes effort, and yes, as Maziel said, that's what makes the reward worth it.

[Cutthroat]

Myself, I have been over any type of enjoyment of "the grind" For around 8 years. I freely admit that I skill my PCs up as fast as codedly possible so I can move along to the important stuff, Roleplaying with you all, plotting etc.

I know I can take any PC and move it from zero to uber in an amount of time that is silly low, And of course get yelled at by staff for doing something that I feel I really should not have to do any more...go figure.

Yep, if newbies have to follow the roleplaying tip in help faq_9, veterans do too.

But anyway, here is my idea on that note.

Have it so somebody can start with a skill advanced PC, but they actually have to SPEND the karma for it. As in, Hey, you want a human warrior starting with all skills at least JM, fine, you lose 2 karma..better hope he lasts a while.

SoI has something similar to this, but as far as I know, those PCs also start in clanned roles. After all, it makes sense for the Captain of the Orc Killing Army (or whatever) to have increased skills. But to have something like that in Armageddon, you need to have some compelling reason for the skills to be as high as you request. That's basically the purpose of a Special Application, or some sponsored roles where boosts might be appropriate.

[Nyr]

Nyr you are snarky period. Do not pretend that anyone provokes you. If you were not a member of the staff I am confident you would be banned from the gdb.

Be careful; there's only so much snark we'll handle before we consider it trolling staff.  Then the jackboots come out.

[Titania]

Nyr you are snarky period. Do not pretend that anyone provokes you. If you were not a member of the staff I am confident you would be banned from the gdb.

Be careful; there's only so much snark we'll handle before we consider it trolling staff.  Then the jackboots come out.

Do what you gotta do.

[Maziel]

 

[Adhira]

This thread seems to have diverged from a discussion about OOC formation of groups to commentary on the karma system.  Both are valid discussions.  The formation of OOC groups, as already expressed by Nyr, is not something that we are willing to compromise on.

The discussion on karma and getting over the grind is something that has been discussed many times by both staff and players.  Staff recognise that there are some things we can do better and we have a number of ideas that we think will greatly enhance the way character generation and karma is used for Arm 2.  We have also been discussing different methods and alterations for Arm 1 for several months at Producer level, and now at general staff level. You may find in the coming months that some changes occur, and we hope that they will help inject a new dimension to character generation.

It seems that the term 'snarkiness' is being thrown about in this thread.  I suggest that if people want to be treated with respect they give others the same respect.  Attacking people who disagree with you or will not bend to your will isn't the way to go and will result in the thread being locked.

[Synthesis]

I kinda like the grind, but I suppose I'm easily amused like that.  I still get little giggles when I make something splatter blood all over the place.

[Adhira]

I kinda like the grind, but I suppose I'm easily amused like that.  I still get little giggles when I make something splatter blood all over the place.

It's the little things.

[lepxii]

My 2 'sids:

1. Karma is, if at all, used too much rather than too little. Achieving/losing karma is rather arbitrary and is dependent on a multitude of factors that are beyond a player's control - it depends who is watching him, when he plays, and so on. Maybe it is a good system for controlling what it does control, but extending it to even more player experience variables is not a good idea.
2. OOC groups suck - they take interesting interactions from inside the game to outside the game. Clans, IMHO, have erred in this direction as well (it seems much of the interesting interactions happen by e-mail/request-tool, because of a multitude of reasons....) - but OOC formed groups are infinitely worst. If you are plotting to overthrow the world (or steal silk from a Kadian) - it is more interesting if it -all- happens IG, and whomever might want to foil your attempt has the chance to do so.
3. Policing OOC groups is hard. Sure, if it is blatant staff will probably catch on, eventually. But it's a hard job.

[jhunter]

It seems that the term 'snarkiness' is being thrown about in this thread.  I suggest that if people want to be treated with respect they give others the same respect.  Attacking people who disagree with you or will not bend to your will isn't the way to go and will result in the thread being locked.

In the other player's defense, I'm also of the opinion that Nyr does spark up the snarkiness from time to time without being provoked to begin with. It's one thing to retaliate it's another to start the fire to begin with. I've learned that you just have to take it or get notes put on your account and banned from the GDB if you aren't willing to sit and take it from a staffer. Nyr is my only truly bad experience with the staff in all my time playing this game.

[Adhira]

We have no issue with how Nyr is moderating the gdb.  It's a task that many staff are unwilling to take on, to the point that some do not even read the gdb and we're happy that Nyr is willing to do so.

[jhunter]

Well, people aren't having issues with Nyr for no reason. *shrug*

[jalden]

What is the official rule on this?

I've co-created a couple of characters where we've mentioned the other player's character as a relative.  This is the closest thread I can find to answering how that process works. Does having a relative always require a special application? A couple years back, a close friend and I special apped characters as fraternal twins. It was clear that they were twins, and we were both specifically told that the special applications were not necessary to play those characters. We were also told that the applications should have been done through the regular app process. So... I'm confused about this.

[wizturbo]

All bickering and snark-tossing aside...  I can't help but feel that I agree with some of the sentiment floating around on the GDB about restrictive policies.  This OOC Coordination policy I honestly could care less about, it seems relatively minor.  It's the greater topic of restrictive policies that concerns me.  Equally concerning is the defensive attitude that the public facing members of the staff seem to take whenever people challenge the status quo by suggesting a change.

After a few years away, I come back and find Armageddon has changed. 

• No new clans or organizations can be officially formed.
• Slave roles are no longer available.  If enslaved, the PC is force stored even if they'd like to play out the role.
• Some cool organizations are gone.  I'd elaborate more, but it may be viewed as IC sensitive. 
• Every sponsered role (and nearly every clan) seems to be mundane only. To the point that I don't even find myself wondering OOCly if any sponsered PC's are secretly anything but mundane. A feeling I often had in the old days and miss greatly.
• The overall 'rank' that PC's can attain seems to be artifically capped, so ascension to things like senior templar, senior merchant house, or noble positions don't seem possible any longer. 

The list goes on and on.  And to me, it's a real shame. One of the beauties of a MUD is that it's small enough to be monitored closely for abuse, and simple enough to be modified and changed with relative ease versus something that has a graphical component.  These policies don't seem to be embracing the strengths of a MUD.

I can tell that each of these decisions were made with care, and were implemented with the absolute best of intentions at reducing abuse or making things easier on staff.  I don't doubt that each change had good reasons behind it.  I just wonder if the cure is worse than the disease.  I wonder if padding the sharp corners of the playground that is Zalanthas ends up making the playground less fun as a result.  It might cut down on whining from those who occasionally get snagged by these 'sharp corners', but in my experience the only time people stop whining about a game is when they no longer play it.

Anyhow...sorry if this is viewed as derailing the OP's topic.  I just see this as the heart of the matter.

[My 2 sids]

 OOC communication is easiest (perhaps even best way) to really hash out a full plot.  And there lies the trouble, Wizturbo has hit the nail on the head -- players directing and creating plots isn't something the Staff really wants. 

There are different ways to lead:  it just seems the current staff is more "stick" than "carrot", rather put on lots of rules to restrict the possibility of a few problems, kind of like the teacher who uses a lot of "whole class punishments" than only targeting the actual people responsible.

Why some snark-type people can't simply say, "While your argument is a good one, we just don't see the MUD going in that direction" instead of pretending like the argument has no merit, I don't know.

[Ocotillo]

You're right: it's much more mature to resolve an argument down to a false choice that leaves your conclusion as the only valid choice.

Personally, I've spent plenty of time in games with lots of "players directing and creating plots," and while sure, parts of it are nifty-keen, I also can appreciate the virtues of the emergent-and-staff-poked model, and recognize the flaws of a model more dependent on OOC interaction. I don't want to commit the same sin I accuse you of, so I'll say it: yes, Armageddon could be different, and better in many ways, if it went more for carrots and player control and OOC coordination and what have you.

But I'll also say, and own this personally rather than try to attribute it to logic, that I really like the way stuff works right now. Playing Arm is peaceful (!) for me because I just have to deal with the login screen and the request tool and hand over my experience to the game and the staff. I haven't really had a bad experience with another player, and the closest to a bad experience I had with staff was one getting mildly grumpy with me when I played a tribal and promptly ran them straight to House employment.

Put sassily: I don't come to Arm to play delicate, unique flowers. I come to play ginka vines. I will happily seize all the blood and brainz staff lets me have and thrive on them, and I'll get by. I realize I seem like I'm a rationalizing kissass, and you're right: I am. That's what the ginka does to survive. And I came here for the challenge, not just the fascinating plots.

[Niamh]

...players directing and creating plots isn't something the Staff really wants. 

This is completely untrue.  We have even switched up our methods of staffing to allow players more freedom to create and direct their own plots.  This is why we do not animate "boss" NPCs to give people "quests" the way that we used to.

[Marshmellow]

I have to disagree with you, My 2 Sids.  I don't think the rules stifle our ability to create plots.  I don't see the need to OOCly communicate to create plots.  To coordinate RPTs, sure, but that can be done through clan forums or through using 'ooc' to communicate with others not in-clan.  We don't need anything else.  The type of OOC coordination we're talking about here, though, is "I'll play a X and you play a Y and we'll hook up and be friends IC!"  That kind of coordination is vile.  It creates insta-loyalty whereas everyone else has to earn loyalty and trust, giving someone a benefit that nobody else has which is wrong and unfair to the rest of the players... or do we want the cliques that develop to be able to do things like the Klestions again?  Sure, they drove plots, but it was unrealistically done.  They were able to, for a time, maintain a strangle-hold on just about everything going on in Tuluk.  A family of about half a dozen people were able to checkmate the two most powerful Chosen houses... who have that many people just to wipe the Chosens' asses... in each house.

[Zoltan]

I mostly like the way things are now. Certain things that happened years ago that don't happen now struck me as fucktarded, so I'm glad for those changes. Having free reign in a clan as a leader is pretty cool too. But like anyone, I have a few gripes of my own.

First, systematically here, things seem to take a little longer to boil on the large-scale without staff animated NPCs urging quests to happen. Sometimes I wish more blatant things would happen just to keep things moving. Then again, it's sort of a two-way street, which leads to my next little gripe...

I'm ever a proponent of Keeping It Real with a character and not being a 'tard just for the sake of a little excitement, but it seems to me that IG the status quo is god. Due to how long it can take to get serious things going, I think that many players are hesitant to endanger their plots or their characters. Then again, some characters strike me as being powerful just for the sake of it, or to keep walking in place. You combine this with the staff's hesitancy to provide a really firm nudge into excitement, and yeah, things can sometimes feel staid. Some of this could be a matter of perception, though, because often super-plots need to be super-sekret, so take that for what it's worth. Still, time and time again, I feel like I've seen so many powerful PCs just maintaining formation. But yeah, hard to blame people considering their playing someone realistically, and all this time has been put into it.

Which brings me to my other relatively little gripe: the grind. The grind has outright killed at least one of my good characters, that is, they became utterly unfun to play. Now, this can be mitigated by doing a spec app, sure, but that requires a damn good concept with a damn good reason for being in the game. Still, I don't like the idea of anyone (including myself) with a chunk of karma getting to just jump in the game as a moderately-skilled (make that super-skilled, in relation to the dozens of other noobs) warrior/assassin/Krathi/whatever. Then again, sometimes I do get a little wistful thinking what it may be like to jump immediately into an old, survivable desert wanderer, or into a mage THAT CAN ACTUALLY BE A MAGE at the start of play. But I tend to view this gripe as more of a personal feeling towards the game than the game's fault. It's really a matter of my own patience, but judging by the amount of people bemoaning, I suppose it's a real issue for the playerbase.

[Cutthroat]

OOC communication is easiest (perhaps even best way) to really hash out a full plot.  And there lies the trouble, Wizturbo has hit the nail on the head -- players directing and creating plots isn't something the Staff really wants.

What I've seen in game and on the GDB (through RPT announcements) runs entirely contrary to this seemingly popular argument. The staff absolutely want players to create plots and direct them. Since the last HRPT there have been many player-run plots, everywhere. If you can't see examples of this in game, look harder or look elsewhere. It's usually not all that hidden. Or try to start a plot on your own. If your PC has the means and the world could conceivably allow it, it's only a matter of reporting to staff and roleplaying the effort.

Why some snark-type people can't simply say, "While your argument is a good one, we just don't see the MUD going in that direction" instead of pretending like the argument has no merit, I don't know.

To be honest, I don't see the argument as "good" when it's presented as the only viable choice and there are no efforts to argue against the counterproposals offered.

[Nyr]

OOC communication is easiest (perhaps even best way) to really hash out a full plot.  And there lies the trouble, Wizturbo has hit the nail on the head -- players directing and creating plots isn't something the Staff really wants.  

There are different ways to lead:  it just seems the current staff is more "stick" than "carrot", rather put on lots of rules to restrict the possibility of a few problems, kind of like the teacher who uses a lot of "whole class punishments" than only targeting the actual people responsible.

Why some snark-type people can't simply say, "While your argument is a good one, we just don't see the MUD going in that direction" instead of pretending like the argument has no merit, I don't know.

There is evidence to the contrary out there, but I don't have a problem with people thinking that anymore.  Speaking as an administrator, I much prefer supporting player-led plots and causing the gameworld to react appropriately than supporting something I wrote up myself.  

I have some small issue with OOC communication itself, but we're not talking about just talking out-of-character about the game, about a past role, about getting playtimes together, about talking on the GDB, or even about creating a family role together.

I'm not convinced that the argument for OOC coordination to create preset roles to work with other characters based on a karma system that depicts how many people the initial coordinator can have in their OOC-ly created group is a good one.  I can understand the frustration with finding conflict and roles in-game.  I do think this would be one policy solution to that.  I also think this would be the cause of several problems that are much worse.  The good thing--having a preset role to jump into with some friends--spells the benefits out in advance.  The reason that the staff rebuttal may be a hard argument to swallow is that the problems we expect would happen out of this system are intangible and based on staff experience and some player experience.  If family roles could be perverted to the point that we had to make rules to make it fair for everyone that doesn't metagame...

[Malifaxis]

Alright, I had 3 hours of sleep.  I'm going to try to type this, I'm going to try to be civil, and then I'm going to edit it out and maybe post it whole cloth on my blog, with the nice-ified version here.

No one should ever get a leg up OOC'ly in this game, REGARDLESS of karma.  If married couples (of which I know several play the game) go through great lengths to keep their roles separate (Kudos to you, Frenchy and Cajun, the same to you Dig and Path, and so many more) in game, then there's no reason a group of buddies should be able to hop in and start the next Conclave just because they have a smattering of karma.

So you are against the karma system?

He never mentioned anything about the karma system, and what he did mention has nothing to do with the karma system.

Bring on the murderous gang of buddy warriors or, it would be *Gasp* fun and entertaining. Keep your imaginary RP integrety and bring on some action.

This has been done without OOC coordination, and it's been done repeatedly, and it's been done well.  Your idea would eliminate the "done well" portion.  The word, by the way, is "integrity."

You are the snarkiest poster on the GDB also.

Nyr is delicate.  Nyr is professional and diplomatic.  Nyr is approachable on the GDB and through request, puts a LOT of time into making the game better, and applies snark in medical and theraputic amounts. You, on the other hand, wield your snark with all the subtlety of a jackhammer at a wet t-shirt contest.

And really, you didn't even know there was a karma chart before you started this thread?  FFS.  May I suggest playing the game for a while before you decide to restructure it from the ground up?

One of the reasons the staff trusts the people they have given karma is because of the exact fact that they DO NOT ENGAGE IN OOC Coordination, even when forming families or groups pre-entry!  

As for my opinion on stagnation? Where is any conflict that is anything but petty squabbling? Everyone says to be the change, but if you do anything to break up the hand holding festival, you'll get slapped down from on high. Maybe if players had groups that the Houses could target, it would liven things up.

Yeah, this game's about as stagnant as [CENSORED BECAUSE WHAT I SAID HERE IS ACTUALLY SO UNCOOL I'M NOT EVEN POSTING IT ON MY BLOG BECAUSE MY MOTHER READS IT, AND SHE WAS THE ONE WHO TAUGHT ME HOW TO SWEAR].  I myself have changed this game repeatedly through IC action only.  No staff coordination, no nothing.  I saw something, I worked towards it, it changed.  The same goes for several other people who are posting in this thread.

In comparison, you have changed this game by donating boots.  Kudos.

I guess I don't care if the houses never got another PC.I guess I don't care if the houses never got another PC.

Oh, well, since you put it that way, lets do away with all the clans.  This game is about playing a coherent and realistic harsh fantasy world.  In a world like this, people would band together.  Without the clans, it would not be realistic.  Without the independents, it would also not be realistic.

Sorry your time constraints suck.  Might I suggest Final Fantasy or WoW?  I'm sure the staff there will be far more capitulating to your "suggestions."

I really don't see how having a little flexibility and trust in the players would cause an apocalypse.

The staff is very flexible with people who are reasonable.  There's a very important word in there.  I've highlighted it.

IN DEFENSE OF THE POOR, UNPOPULAR, HATED NYR:

Nyr's job sucks.  Moderating the GDB has got to be the shittiest job on the game.  Doing it with style, a splattering of humor, and a hand that is both gentle and very, very firm is something I personally am thankful for.  Nyr puts countless hours into this game in an effort to make it a sociable environment for all those who play.  

Some of the players hate Nyr because they have been bitchsmacked.  In my experience, these bitchsmackings are always warranted.  I myself have felt the Almighty Fist o' Nyr when I was too much of a jackass.  I may very well feel it again after I hit 'post' below.  I fully realize that sometimes I cross the line on my commentary, that sometimes I am too harsh.  Why do I realize that?  Because I'm a logical, mature person who happens to have a very low threshold for bullshit, and sometimes when I call people out, my control slips and I end up going off a bit too harshly.  I thank Nyr for the times I have been called on this, as it's helped me become a better person and learn some self control.

OOC communication is easiest (perhaps even best way) to really hash out a full plot.  And there lies the trouble, Wizturbo has hit the nail on the head -- players directing and creating plots isn't something the Staff really wants.

I'd agree with this if I didn't see the evidence to the contrary ON A DAILY BASIS.



Hitting submit, hoping I don't get banned, did my best to edit this out and make it semi-non-inflamatory while still getting my point across with what I consider to be a "reasonable amount" of snark.

If I get slapped for a week or longer, know that I love you all, and that when I return, I'll still love this game and the staff that put in so much of their real lives to govern it just as much as I did pre-smack.

[Nyr]

Actually, I selected the name of the new thread since the other thread kept getting derailed after I suggested folks not derail it.  I usually will do that if I have to split off a thread from derailment, whether I cause it or whether someone else does.

[Malifaxis]

*grumble*

I'll edit that out then.

[Cutthroat]

To be fair, it was somewhat modest to start, however since then proponents have largely dodged those who have constructive criticism about the idea. It would be nice if someone supporting this idea could say why this:

What I don't understand exactly is how you can't do this with the rules that are already in place. If you want to make a group of hunters, for example, that's fine. Get three family members the usual way and recruit hunters in game. The family could lead the group, while the rest are "employees" or whatever else you could imagine. But you're never going to have everything set up for you, whether you're playing a few hours a day or a few hours a week

Isn't a good compromise between the way current things are, and the proposal. It would also be nice if anyone against the proposed idea could say how that breaks any of the rules in place (I don't see any way it does).

[Malifaxis]

To be fair, it was somewhat modest to start, however since then proponents have largely dodged those who have constructive criticism about the idea. It would be nice if someone supporting this idea could say why this:

What I don't understand exactly is how you can't do this with the rules that are already in place. If you want to make a group of hunters, for example, that's fine. Get three family members the usual way and recruit hunters in game. The family could lead the group, while the rest are "employees" or whatever else you could imagine. But you're never going to have everything set up for you, whether you're playing a few hours a day or a few hours a week

Isn't a good compromise between the way current things are, and the proposal. It would also be nice if anyone against the proposed idea could say how that breaks any of the rules in place (I don't see any way it does).

Sorry I must have missed this in my vitriol fueled pique of rage and then rapid scrub-edit.

I think this is a perfectly reasonable way to do this, but then again, I'm just this dude. 

Thanks, Cutthroat, for being sane.

[lordcooper]

Yeah.  You can still pretty much set up your little OOC group so long as you tag "Oh yeah, and they're all cousins" on the end.

[wizturbo]

OOC communication is easiest (perhaps even best way) to really hash out a full plot.  And there lies the trouble, Wizturbo has hit the nail on the head -- players directing and creating plots isn't something the Staff really wants. 

That isn't what I was trying to say in my post.  Not even a little bit.  I think the staff do want us to direct and run plots.  I just wonder if all of the restrictive policies are making it more difficult, and taking away some of the fun of the game.

[Drayab]

I'd like to think folks that are putting together families are doing it because they want to roleplay what a Zalanthan family is like.

[Cutthroat]

Yeah.  You can still pretty much set up your little OOC group so long as you tag "Oh yeah, and they're all cousins" on the end.

Yeah, I suppose it seems like it's skirting the rules a bit; however, the way I imagine it is like a cottage industry. The family plies a trade together and hires people to get the raw materials needed to continue their trade. It's pretty viable in-game, and I like to think that at least some of the shops run by independent NPCs operate in something like this manner. The players of the family members technically are allowed to go any way they want once they're in game, provided it's IC, and if it's IC for Amos Jr. to walk away from the Amos and Son Basketweavers Company, then he certainly should.

I myself have changed this game repeatedly through IC action only.  No staff coordination, no nothing.  I saw something, I worked towards it, it changed.  The same goes for several other people who are posting in this thread.

Very good point which bears repeating, so there it is, in a box. I felt when I started playing this game four years ago that my PC's actions wouldn't amount to much. However as time went on I started to feel that was not the case. OP is perhaps a newer player that hasn't had the chance to appreciate the evolution-like feeling of realizing how different things are once you begin to interact with players in a deep way, and cooperate on ways to change your little spot in the Known, or the world in its entirety.

I'd like to think folks that are putting together families are doing it because they want to roleplay what a Zalanthan family is like.

Would a Zalanthan family work together? I would say "sometimes".

[jhunter]

On topic, I could care less about this rule one way or another. I understand the reasoning it's there but I don't really think it's gonna break the game without it.

[Nyr]

Moderated out a derail that really isn't pertinent to anything in this thread.  If you hate me you can go put in a staff complaint.  I'll stack it with my others.

[Marc]

Firstly:  All I see in the GDB menu board is RE: A Modest Proposal.  Am I the only one who thought our famine problems were over? (nyuk nyuk nyuk).

Jokes aside, there is probably a sizable portion of our player base who do not remember how things were before these rules.  Back when 90% of the players and staff could be found on ISCA and OOC coordination was the name of the game even if officially disdained.  Groups, long-lost brothers, cousins, kids.  This sort of thing happened a lot (from my hazy memory) but it always seemed to be the same characters recycled I.E. lose one brother, reroll another.  Families could go on forever this way.

Example where players go to far: RL friend was the (PC) Guild leader back in the day.  "I wanna play with you!" Next char is suddenly heir to the Guild without any RP just because I made him the leader's family WITHOUT ANY STAFF OVERSIGHT or IN-GAME efforts.

Example where this culture causes stupidity: I wanted to make a gypsy.  Instead of sending in an email with my character concept (recruitment wasn't handled this way) I sit through a couple phone calls with "The Wildflower" and am told a few rumors to pass around if anyone asks about my char OOC to help metagame up the Maurk as invincible.

Example three: An icon of this game once recruited me in-game based off an ooc inquiry.  He later told me he would never have hired me based off my in-game actions if he, the player, had not agreed OOC.  My character was also a blood-member of a rival group, also established ooc.  In the end I had a spy in the opposing camp with about 15 minutes of game time and absolutely 0 in-game trail.  Stupid.
(These were last millenia.  Nothing even remotely recent.)

It's a slippery slope that we have tumbled down before.  If you allow people to extensively coordinate OOC, or at least coordinate to some degree, you are indirectly promoting OOC communication.  OOC communication CAN be totally harmless but often it is not.  By supporting and nurturing a culture where OOC coordination is the norm you are in turn supporting a culture of OOC communication and this leads to ruined plots, ruined experiences and general "spilling of the beans".

Yes we're adults (most of us), yes we can be trusted (most of us), but why take the chance?  I think this is what staff has decided.  The potential negatives outweigh the potential gains.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another point on the inflexibility of the world:  This used to drive me batty.  "WTF do you mean I can't get rid of Salarr if I kill them all and set up weaponshops!?  If you just let me do it, STAFF, I could do it!"  Now it really is comforting.

The Noble Houses, the Merchant Houses.  The organizations that are seemingly unshakable offer the backdrop for our stories.  They are the pillars that you can build your tales upon.  Sure, we could allow more dramatic and quick acting changes (coding/building questions aside), but this would mean that when we leave Crackageddon for a brief sojourn and return months or even years later it would not be the same game.  To me there is something comforting in that.  Does this mean we should not allow any dramatic changes to the gameworld?  Absolutely not.  We should allow ANYTHING to happen, however, if it IS something dramatic (taking out a House or similar) the plot involved should be so far fetching and involve such huge casts of PCs that the HOW it happened would not be a mystery to anyone.  Amos the assassin/weaponcrafter didn't decide one day Salarr was total crap and go around backstabbing every PC/NPC he could find until the House died out.  Instead there would be many many stories about what was done IN GAME to make it happen.

[Drayab]

I'd like to think folks that are putting together families are doing it because they want to roleplay what a Zalanthan family is like.

Would a Zalanthan family work together? I would say "sometimes".

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Family roleplay is an area that has not been explored much. There isn't public documentation on the subject, so it's largely up to players to imagine what it would be like. There is a huge realm of possibilities to be explored there, which is why it seems super lame to use a family concept as a way to skirt OOC organization restrictions.

[jstorrie]

When you title something 'a modest proposal,' you're presenting it as satire...

[Reiloth]

Here are a series of statements:

Plots that are OOCly communicated are not better than plots generated entirely IG. In fact, communication OOC -will- ruin plots IG, without a doubt. I have been here for eight years, and have both participated in this and seen it happen. It sucks.

All roles I have played that started with even a modest skill bump were not nearly as fun as the characters I started from the ground up. (As per the idea of karma equalling any sort of skill boost).

I earned every point of Karma I have; it was not given to me because I asked.

Armageddon is a harsh MUD with no freebies or short-cuts.

Barzalene's recent family post should be stickied, as it was probably the most fundamental Family Posting by the book.

In short, I do not think this modest proposal for OOC coordination has a solid enough argument. Encouraging any sort of OOC communication will lead to far too many holes in the dam. Plots generated IC, Family  found through the GDB after approving a concept through the Staff. That is all.

[boog]

I have rarely found OOC communications to be beneficial in any roleplay game I have ever played. Other than coordinating times online in clan forums, I feel that any OOC communication I have with anyone in regards to this game or any seriously takes away from its mystique.

I like randomly being involved with plots. I like randomly interacting with people. I like the random that comes with the mystery of not knowing if X character is gonna gut/maim/whatever your PC, or love them to death, use them, abuse them, whateva.

I don't understand really, other than coordinating clans and the odd and small group of players (player announcements), what the draw to OOCly interacting in this game is. If you need to communicate with someone over AIM that some fine Kadian merchant just waltzed around in your turf with all their silks and jewels on and not a guard in sight to own them, then it's quite sad that you feel you need a leg up in a -game-.

[Spice Spice Baby]

Would a Zalanthan family work together? I would say "sometimes".

As someone who's done the family member thing a time or three, I would just like to state for the record that these roles are often more fun when the family members do not work together or actively hate each other.

[Malifaxis]

Would a Zalanthan family work together? I would say "sometimes".

As someone who's done the family member thing a time or three, I would just like to state for the record that these roles are often more fun when the family members do not work together or actively hate each other.

Oh ShaLeah... where have you gone.  So much fun, the silver triplets.

[Cindy42]

.... I like Nyr. I like all the staff, actually. And I feel bad when I die, because it means work for them.

Anyway... this thread is kind of inspiring, and I'd enjoy seeing more IC group-making besides [IC group redacted by Nyr]. Seeing more small non city-state based clans which spend most of their time hopping between settled populations for work sounds fun, as their lack of protection makes excellent plot tools and fodder for templars and any PCs watching. I see nothing wrong with the current system that a little imagination or a Focus couldn't fix. Being a non-karmic myself, I miss out on the opportunity to see small-timer gangs and groups in the deserts duking it out without God-king protection and would really enjoy seeing random merchant or assassin groups popping up, possibly racially or birthplace based, and a member or leader of one getting into a drunken brawl with the leader of another, or Tek help us, a highly-respected member of Kurac, who at the time has greatly pleased a 'naki templar, thus constraining said small group's relations with the 'nak city-state as a whole... I feel almost like I'm preparing to eat at a steak-house at the thought of it.

[Xeran Van Houten]

Probably not a good idea to mention current IC groups that arn't the actual coded clans...

But yeah, it's not hard to make a group IC - finding trustworthy people to run it with you is a grand adventure itself.

[Semper]

.... I like Nyr. I like all the staff, actually. And I feel bad when I die, because it means work for them.

Anyway... this thread is kind of inspiring, and I'd enjoy seeing more IC group-making besides. Seeing more small non city-state based clans which spend most of their time hopping between settled populations for work sounds fun, as their lack of protection makes excellent plot tools and fodder for templars and any PCs watching. I see nothing wrong with the current system that a little imagination or a Focus couldn't fix. Being a non-karmic myself, I miss out on the opportunity to see small-timer gangs and groups in the deserts duking it out without God-king protection and would really enjoy seeing random merchant or assassin groups popping up, possibly racially or birthplace based, and a member or leader of one getting into a drunken brawl with the leader of another, or Tek help us, a highly-respected member of Kurac, who at the time has greatly pleased a 'naki templar, thus constraining said small group's relations with the 'nak city-state as a whole... I feel almost like I'm preparing to eat at a steak-house at the thought of it.

Sounds like you can write a story now...  
You say you're inspired? Make it work! There's several opportunities available to players without having to bend or even come close to the restrictions set in place. And even then, you can probably bring it up to the staff for consideration if it's particularly awesome.

[HammerofJericho]

I still vote on having the Who C command put back in. That's along the lines of OOC Communication isn't it?

[HavokBlue]

I still vote on having the Who C command put back in. That's along the lines of OOC Communication isn't it?

Except most people would log in, WHO C, see nobody online in their clan, and log off.

[Reiloth]

I still vote on having the Who C command put back in. That's along the lines of OOC Communication isn't it?

Except most people would log in, WHO C, see nobody online in their clan, and log off.

I think that's a misconception. The people that used Who C for such reasons would now just as likely contact 'everyone in my clan' before logging off. I personally don't mind, but if I was playing a Templar looking for my soldier dudes, i'd be pissed about who c being taken out.

[Marshmellow]

'who c' wasn't infallible.

[Timetwister]

Who c makes no difference. If you don't think people have lists upon lists (especially in clans) of people on aim you're kidding yourself.

[Timetwister]

No one should ever get a leg up OOC'ly in this game, REGARDLESS of karma.  If married couples (of which I know several play the game) go through great lengths to keep their roles separate (Kudos to you, Frenchy and Cajun, the same to you Dig and Path, and so many more) in game, then there's no reason a group of buddies should be able to hop in and start the next Conclave just because they have a smattering of karma.

People get a leg up OOCly all the time. Anybody who has played the game long enough already has a leg up OOCly because they've learned the areas, read every bit of docs out there, and know how to play the political side of the game. I rarely post on the GDB because there is a political side to it and the "cliques" on the gdb frustrate people like myself to no end.

[Barzalene]

Join the clique

[Jdr]

I wish I was cool enough to be in a clique. Who wants me in their clique?

[HammerofJericho]

I'll take ya Jdr.

[Marshmellow]

Who c makes no difference. If you don't think people have lists upon lists (especially in clans) of people on aim you're kidding yourself.

I do not, intentionally so.  I only communicate with other players through the GDB.

[Marc]

Who c makes no difference. If you don't think people have lists upon lists (especially in clans) of people on aim you're kidding yourself.

I do not, intentionally so.  I only communicate with other players through the GDB.

[Timetwister]

I'll take your word for it. 

[racurtne]

I've been playing for one year and one month. No AIM lists here. Apparently I'm not cool enough.

[HavokBlue]

You have to play for one year and two months, plus find out the secret password.

Really.

[jstorrie]

I've been playing for ages and I don't really like it when people try to get chatty on AIM with me.

[Fathi]

I don't really like it when jstorrie sends me his sex logs and brags about his PC's perfume collection. It's gross.

[Reiloth]

I don't really like it when jstorrie sends me his sex logs and brags about his PC's perfume collection. It's gross.

But she does like it when I paste classic ejaculations.

[Akaramu]

Who c makes no difference. If you don't think people have lists upon lists (especially in clans) of people on aim you're kidding yourself.

I do not, intentionally so.  I only communicate with other players through the GDB.

I don't give people my AIM. I talk to ONE person on it, that's it, and I'm sure many others feel the same way. If anyone wants to set up playtimes for a meeting, they can use forum PMs. 

Perhaps who C could be something that is only given to the leaders? But that would probably be difficult to implement codewise.

[hyzhenhok]

Who c makes no difference. If you don't think people have lists upon lists (especially in clans) of people on aim you're kidding yourself.

Sounds like a projection to justify one's behavior as normal and typical to me.

[Rhyden]

I wish I was cool enough to be in a clique. Who wants me in their clique?

I thought we were in a clique.

To be a little bit more on topic, I've been on both sides of the fence and simply put, you have WAY more fun when there is zero OOC coordination.

That said, it is essential when creating family roles, but once the family is created, the OOC coordination should be dropped for full enjoyment.

[Potaje]

[edited]

[Potaje]

 It would seem that I keep hitting the wrong buttons. OOPS.

no further comment.