Policy Discussion: 2011

[musashi]

I don't see a problem with it either, insofar as to say that those things should not be being played by PC's anymore than black robes should.

All I'm saying is that the "this is unrelated" part of what Nyr said seems incorrect, because the glass ceiling does exist for badass, powerful  whatever's as well. They will reach a point where staff will decide that by whatever reason or circumstance, they are so uber that they turn into a different kind of thing, and that thing cannot be played by players, so they're forced into storage.

Much like how a templar/noble getting getting too powerful in the political sense would become such a different kind of character that they couldn't be played by players, ending in the same result.

Does that make sense?

[Cutthroat]

There are two policy decisions in particular that I don't entirely agree with:

The "glass ceiling": I can understand why the game doesn't need PC black-robes, Precentors, heads of Houses, and other people of extreme power and seclusion. I can also understand, to an extent, the desire to keep players away from lower promotions, like red-robe or mid-level senior positions - because if there's only one person in a certain group that deserves it, they will become more powerful than the others that don't yet. What I don't understand is why it was allowed in the past, and why it was taken away after it was seemingly successful.

Veteran players may remember - and remember well - characters like Samos, Serilla, Elithan, etc. who were all promoted just one step up from where they started, and still seemed to contribute greatly to goings-on while maintaining their position well ICly. Perhaps players of those long-gone characters could chime in on their own experiences. While rewards for characters that deserve them are great, it seems that they are not given out often, if at all. I would wager that this is one of the reasons why some people, likely Achiever-types, in long-lived sponsored roles store - because after a point there are less places to go, less things to do, and it feels more and more like they're not being noticed for what they are managing to do.

Veteran staffers remember them well and did not have problems with the players. 

That one-step-up promotion surely doesn't work in Allanak.  I've reviewed several e-mails between staff and the player of Samos as well as other players where even the player OF the Red Robe is saying that there are plenty of OOC and even IC misunderstandings about the vast gulf between the average person (even Privates) and the role of a Red Robe.  I'll reiterate once more:  it doesn't work.  Could we make another fake rank between Blue Robe and Red Robe?  Maybe.  Could we do what we already do, and provide lateral promotions/moves/etc like I've mentioned before?  Yep.

The one-step-up promotion barely worked in Tuluk, for similar reasons. 

Thanks, Nyr. That bit about the separation between the rankings makes sense. I think what I'm trying to say is that
1) those lateral promotions don't seem to be done often enough to have the same rewarding effect as an upward promotion, and
2) it seems that there is only so much lateral movement one can do, that by the time a particular PC has "widened" as far as possible, there is little left to achieve.

Of course that's just my perception and it could be vastly different in practice, or could have been different during differing times. But my feeling is that if the game is solely going to focus upon allowing PCs to expand on their level without moving up, then staff need to let players and their PCs know what they achieve, when they achieve it, what else they could achieve, and especially let them know when there is nothing formal left to achieve.

[Nyr]

I don't see a problem with it either, insofar as to say that those things should not be being played by PC's anymore than black robes should.

All I'm saying is that the "this is unrelated" part of what Nyr said seems incorrect, because the glass ceiling does exist for badass, powerful  whatever's as well. They get so uber that they turn into a different kind of thing, and that thing cannot be played by players, so they're forced into storage; just like a templar getting promoted too high would become such a different kind of character that they couldn't be played by players, and hence, would wind up in the same boat.

That make sense?

You're attributing a quote I made about something else to a different situation.  I was parsing out a section from a full post here:

If someone does enough to threaten a city, rise to the top of their order/house/whatever, its "good on them" not, "better make you an NPC" if you want the game to be truly player driven.

If someone does enough to threaten a city, we won't push for storage for that reason.  It is unrelated to that argument.

[musashi]

Ah, my mistake.

I was taking your statement to be in reference to the glass ceiling on PC power levels, being discussed in this thread.

[Nyr]

I quoted several things I wrote from 4-5 months ago about something similar.  Within the things I wrote, some were non sequitur.  That was one of them, a side-note about people threatening cities.

It is possible that we'd force-store someone solely because they were a super-powered sorcerer, psionicist, or elementalist?  I suppose saying "never" is silly because there are always caveats, and players do their best to point out places where we say "never" or "always."  It's unlikely.  I can't name a single case in the past 3-4 years where any of the above guilds were stored solely for that reason.

[Nyr]

A brief check over past Red Robes shows that only one was a non-staffer.  Same with Senators.

[Fredd]

One thing i will definately agree with is thus:

Why are all the sponsored roles Mundane only? They should be more like " if you app with a non-mundane guild, you need to provide an extra paragraph of information. It will be very uncommon none mundanes will be selected"

I can sort of see the GMH needing mundanes, but seriusly, Nobles? These could work for any class, and a psychic or magicker noble concept would be cool. It would even add some extra blackmail skull and dagger to it.

[Is Friday]

Not to step on toes with a reply to that, but I assume that is because of the leg-up that sponsored roles already have politically to start out with. It was once this way and spiraled into "too many" sponsored roles being hidden nilazi/psionist bad asses. Nobles/GMH family already have a shitload of superior tools available to them.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

Plus, nobles and GMH family members are put into the game specifically to employ people and start plots. We don't want to encourage them to shut themselves off from the world and spam-cast.

[wizturbo]

A brief check over past Red Robes shows that only one was a non-staffer.  Same with Senators.

Yet not until there was a policy saying Red Robes are a no-fly-zone has anyone complained that the rank is unattainable and felt limited, despite only one non-staffer in nearly twenty years ever achieving the rank.  The fact is this is a philosophical concern, not a practical one.  People don't like to know that their PC's have a glass ceiling, whether they'll ever achieve these lofty ranks or not.  It's the knowledge that their achievements are limited in scope that rubs people the wrong way.  Take away the policy, let there be the possibility again, and no matter how difficult and challenging it is to attain it there will always be that carrot out there for Templar's that maybe they would be the one to make it.

The same goes for every other unlikely scenario.  A commoner becoming a Templar, why couldn't this be possible no matter how unlikely?  Using a RL example, technically any Catholic could become the Pope.  It will never ever happen, and a cardinal will almost certainly be chosen, but the concept that it's technically possible means something in itself.

[Barzalene]

On the up side, your pc doesn't know about the limitation. You can still -want- to be a senator icly. You can still work for it.

[maxid]

I can sort of see the GMH needing mundanes, but seriusly, Nobles? These could work for any class, and a psychic or magicker noble concept would be cool. It would even add some extra blackmail skull and dagger to it.

There are a few IC reasons as to why this is somewhat unlikely as well.

On the up side, your pc doesn't know about the limitation. You can still -want- to be a senator icly. You can still work for it.

On the downside, it's rather dull to work at something you know will never happen for a lot of people.  Seeing their actions matter is a -huge- draw for people.

[Adhira]

We never said a commoner could not become a Templar.  We also have not laid out where exactly the glass ceilings are.  There are some roles that are still achievable, some are not.  The glass ceiling is the term players have given it. I prefer to think of it as plexiglass, yes there is something of a cap in place, it does have flex. If a situation arose that allowed for a promotion, and someone was in place to take it, it might bend.

[musashi]

A starter PC isn't going to become a noble unless there's a Grey Hunt.  A starter PC isn't ever going to become a templar.  A PC can try to hamstring an entire city-state.  PCs have done this before.  A PC could start as a templar or noble and work their way up.  A PC could start as a GMH family member and work their way up.

I think this is where that notion came from Adhira.

[Adhira]

Nyr lies then Well he doesn't lie, it's probably true that one will never become a Templar, but they can try, and it may happen.  It's not written in stone.

[jhunter]

We never said a commoner could not become a Templar.  We also have not laid out where exactly the glass ceilings are.  There are some roles that are still achievable, some are not.  The glass ceiling is the term players have given it. I prefer to think of it as plexiglass, yes there is something of a cap in place, it does have flex. If a situation arose that allowed for a promotion, and someone was in place to take it, it might bend.

It -might- bend. And what exactly would this "might bend" be determined by? I have a problem with this as it also helps to create issues between players and staff possibly ending with disgruntled players or irritable staffers.
"It bends for this guy but not for this guy, huh must be some favoritism going on."
It shouldn't "might bend" for some and not for others, it should either be attainable by -anyone- in that situation or it should not be attainable for anyone.  
There shouldn't be the chance that there will be two pcs in the same position to rise above this "plexiglass ceiling" one played by one person, another by a different person and one is allowed to break through where the other is not.

[Adhira]

Ok... good point. Let's go back to it being inflexible then. Until such a time we say it is not.

[valeria]

... it should either be attainable by -anyone- in that situation or it should not be attainable for anyone.  ...

I don't think you're ever going to have two PCs in exactly the same situation. 

But even with that consideration aside, the entire game is run based on staff discretion.  Staff is always going to have to make tough choices about whether it makes sense in the game world for something to happen or not, probably based on all the information they have access to that we don't.  They especially when it comes to the more powerful roles, or else we wouldn't even have or need role calls.

[Fredd]

I cant, for the life of me, see how a commoner could become a noble.

[Marc]

I cant, for the life of me, see how a commoner could become a noble.

Grey hunt in Tuluk would be known to any Tuluki.  You win you're a Hlum, the back-of-the-bus nobility.

I'm sure if you use your imagination and watch Gattaca you could think of other ways too.

[Nyr]

Yet not until there was a policy saying Red Robes are a no-fly-zone has anyone complained that the rank is unattainable and felt limited, despite only one non-staffer in nearly twenty years ever achieving the rank.  The fact is this is a philosophical concern, not a practical one.  People don't like to know that their PC's have a glass ceiling, whether they'll ever achieve these lofty ranks or not.  It's the knowledge that their achievements are limited in scope that rubs people the wrong way.  Take away the policy, let there be the possibility again, and no matter how difficult and challenging it is to attain it there will always be that carrot out there for Templar's that maybe they would be the one to make it.

So it's not that there is a glass ceiling--it's that you know there's a glass ceiling?  Because of this kind of argument, this is not the first time that I've wondered whether it's a better policy for us to just not announce anything in the way of policy and just keep everything staff-side.  You can't be unhappy about staff policies if you don't know what they are, after all...

[Fredd]

I cant, for the life of me, see how a commoner could become a noble.

Grey hunt in Tuluk would be known to any Tuluki.  You win you're a Hlum, the back-of-the-bus nobility.

I'm sure if you use your imagination and watch Gattaca you could think of other ways too.

Well, i knew about Hlum. But they wouldn't be made into a Templar.

Gattaca you say? I shall watch this for charie concepts.

[Cutthroat]

I cant, for the life of me, see how a commoner could become a noble.

Besides the Grey Hunt to rise to nobility, there isn't really any documented way to change castes (besides entering the slave caste). In fact more things in the documentation point to the idea that most people will stay within their caste. Of course the staff will say "a commoner could become a templar" but the general rule seems to be "if your PC earns X, your PC gets X". So logically, if your PC manages to earn entry into the templarate then they will get it. The question of how a commoner would go about it is something you'd have to figure out while playing, and the question of probability has already been answered for you.

Since lateral promotions seem to be the most likely it's probably a good idea for the discussion to focus on that aspect.

[Marc]

Yet not until there was a policy saying Red Robes are a no-fly-zone has anyone complained that the rank is unattainable and felt limited, despite only one non-staffer in nearly twenty years ever achieving the rank.  The fact is this is a philosophical concern, not a practical one.  People don't like to know that their PC's have a glass ceiling, whether they'll ever achieve these lofty ranks or not.  It's the knowledge that their achievements are limited in scope that rubs people the wrong way.  Take away the policy, let there be the possibility again, and no matter how difficult and challenging it is to attain it there will always be that carrot out there for Templar's that maybe they would be the one to make it.

So it's not that there is a glass ceiling--it's that you know there's a glass ceiling?  Because of this kind of argument, this is not the first time that I've wondered whether it's a better policy for us to just not announce anything in the way of policy and just keep everything staff-side.  You can't be unhappy about staff policies if you don't know what they are, after all...

This.  So long as ANYTHING is possible ANY character concept can be played and played to the hilt.  It's probably true you can do the same while knowing certain things are not possible, I think it is easier to suspend belief and work towards something when you, the player, believes it possible.

And I think Adhira -IS- saying anything is possible if the circumstances are right.  So long as we, the players, never get a response like "That's a cool idea to build your fast food restaurant on Caravan, but I dont think this is the right time for the player base" but instead "Yep, go for it!" and then have everything fail miserably to some In-game party, whether it be templars, elves, weather, dragonfire.

People will try and fail, which is so much better than never trying at all.

Caveat: We, the players, need to stop 'needing' tangible results at every step.  It is SOOOOOOOOOO nice to see progress (a description change on a construction project or an npc because we trained a goat), but it's just not gonna be possible in every case.  Set your goals as things that can be accomplished without staff.  You want to raise an army of dwarves to take over Allanak?  Start with the PC population, then stockpiling war supplies or whatever.  Dont jump right to getting order'able unit mobs loaded and dont take failure as a personal insult.

[X-D]

Much of this thread I have not really agreed with the posters, on both sides.

I don't see gaining rank as all that important and it seems to me it is not impossible, just much harder then it has been in the past.

You all know I do not agree with the no slaves rule, but as others have said, that has been beat to death anyway.

But one thing I think should be worked on is how staff helps or hinders plot advancement. Often I see staff doing things under the guise of making the world act in a realistic manner but using unrealistic happenings.

And sadly the players, at that point have no recourse and usually will give up.

I have seen, and or been involved in several of them, where the players will work on something for real life months, interacting with staff, supplying logs etc. And yes, staff will put roadblocks in place, this is fine as long as they make sense then the players go on for more real life months of work but then, a setback that makes no sense at all, at that point they go, Meh, fuck it, staff does not want this to happen.

I am not sure how to fix that perception other then maybe staff thinking the roadblock through more or even going, hey, these guys have done everything and passed all the reasonable blocks, let us just let it get done.

And before anybody reads too much into this post, I am not talking about any of my PCs personal advancement quests, all of them got just as hard as I expected them to.