Would you leave the game if Tuluk was made off-limits to players?

[Delirium]

We players play Armageddon for our own enjoyment - just as the staff (presumably) work on staff for their enjoyment - so if there's an area we have tried and dislike playing, it's unfair to accuse us of not having broadened our horizons enough because we choose not to play in an area we haven't enjoyed or otherwise perceive as flawed. Regardless of any radical and/or creative admins running it. Has Tuluk improved? Sure. Do I want to play there? No. Have I played there recently? Yes. Did I like it? No, I did not.

Let's shift perspective a bit to explain my point about not worrying about prior work put into something:

Ultimately, no matter how much blood, sweat, and effort a player puts into telling their character's story, that story ends, and plot-wise, the staff gets final call, so their work is guaranteed to be altered and players can't push back on any final decisions - and usually, that's for the ultimate good of the game. So the moral of the story is to enjoy the process of creativity, and of examining what might be best for the health of the game's population and overall enjoyment going forward, and not get too attached to what you're creating at the moment.

[James de Monet]

I feel like proposing to wipe Tuluk off the face of the Known is like asking if people would quit playing Star Wars games if the Empire was removed.  It's central to the overarching plot of the world.  There might be enough conflict to sustain the game without it, but why?  More plot = more better.

Now, I can see the arguments about consolidating the pbase, but if it really came down to that, I think a far better solution would be to introduce a threat that is so great, it poses an immediate risk of destruction to one city-state, and a long-term one to the other.  So, humanity (or bidpedality), as it so often does, is willing to put aside its grievances for a while and cooperate.  One city-state is abandoned in the wake of massive chaos, destruction and death, but the majority of the population survives.  The refugees of that city-state flood into the other, filling it to bursting.  As the threat sits poised over the wreckage of the lost city-state, the now commingled population of the remaining city-state begins to experience inter-state strife.  Old grudges reemerge, a fight for resources ensues.  Population centers begin to divide along ethnic lines, and suddenly boom, you have two city-states in one.  Force on force conflict becomes gang fights and border squabbles.  'Once more unto the breach...' becomes 'Two households, both alike in dignity...'  The plots continue, the pbase is much more centralized, culture is kept, and new strife and cool new nuances of loyalty (along with an awesome new ruins area) are possible.  Everybody wins.


That being said, however, I still don't find myself in a camp that thinks its a good idea to get rid of Tuluk.  I just think this might be the best solution for dealing with it if it actually became necessary.

[Marauder Moe]

You people should spend less time thinking of ways to shrink the game and more time voting to expand the player base.

 

[Delirium]

Now, I can see the arguments about consolidating the pbase, but if it really came down to that, I think a far better solution would be to introduce a threat that is so great, it poses an immediate risk of destruction to one city-state, and a long-term one to the other.  So, humanity (or bidpedality), as it so often does, is willing to put aside its grievances for a while and cooperate.  One city-state is abandoned in the wake of massive chaos, destruction and death, but the majority of the population survives.  The refugees of that city-state flood into the other, filling it to bursting.  As the threat sits poised over the wreckage of the lost city-state, the now commingled population of the remaining city-state begins to experience inter-state strife.  Old grudges reemerge, a fight for resources ensues.  Population centers begin to divide along ethnic lines, and suddenly boom, you have two city-states in one.  Force on force conflict becomes gang fights and border squabbles.  'Once more unto the breach...' becomes 'Two households, both alike in dignity...'  The plots continue, the pbase is much more centralized, culture is kept, and new strife and cool new nuances of loyalty (along with an awesome new ruins area) are possible.  Everybody wins.

We've done that before... remember the Dragon?

That also leads to the problem of the city-state's god-king not having an effective check to his powers, making it nigh impossible for smaller civilizations to gain a foothold unless on good terms with the surviving city. Unless we wiped out both god-kings in the process, which I would be enthusiastically behind.

[James de Monet]

We've done that before... remember the Dragon?

That also leads to the problem of the city-state's god-king not having an effective check to his powers, making it nigh impossible for smaller civilizations to gain a foothold unless on good terms with the surviving city. Unless we wiped out both god-kings in the process, which I would be enthusiastically behind.

Actually, I wasn't proposing to wipe out either god-king.  Checks remain.  And as to the Dragon, yeah, but that plot did not address the central issue here, which seems to be the geographic consolidation of the players.

[Rathustra]

We players play Armageddon for our own enjoyment - just as the staff (presumably) work on staff for their enjoyment - so if there's an area we have tried and dislike playing, it's unfair to accuse us of not having broadened our horizons enough because we choose not to play in an area we haven't enjoyed or otherwise perceive as flawed. Regardless of any radical and/or creative admins running it. Has Tuluk improved? Sure. Do I want to play there? No. Have I played there recently? Yes. Did I like it? No, I did not.

Let's shift perspective a bit to explain my point about not worrying about prior work put into something:

Ultimately, no matter how much blood, sweat, and effort a player puts into telling their character's story, that story ends, and plot-wise, the staff gets final call, so their work is guaranteed to be altered and players can't push back on any final decisions - and usually, that's for the ultimate good of the game. So the moral of the story is to enjoy the process of creativity, and of examining what might be best for the health of the game's population and overall enjoyment going forward, and not get too attached to what you're creating at the moment.

But my enjoyment of the game is directly linked to working on parts of the game I find interesting - independent and Tuluki clans. As I said - I'd never force anyone to play somewhere they've tried and not enjoyed - the way we allow people to stick to parts of the game that interest them is important to the game. What you're asking is for other people to play somewhere they either have no interest in, play in as much as Tuluk, or have tried and not enjoyed.

I understand your point about prior work, but I also disregard it as the History of Tuluk (IC or OOC) doesn't motivate my position on the topic of destroying/NPC'ing Tuluk. I agree that history shouldn't stop us pulling the trigger - the Tan Muark are perhaps the best example of this.


edit: In fact perhaps this is all a Tan Muarki curse - we took their waterslides and their burden.

[Malken]

Seriously, what keeps me coming back to the game when I do is that I always find concepts that I want to play in TULUK. I never randomly go and think, "Oh, I'd love to play this in Allanak, now I really want to play Arm again."

It's always a Tuluk concept for me.

I don't like playing in Allanak. I tell my friends as a sort of joke that for every PCs you see in Allanak you can be assured that there's 2-3 other PCs hidden in the room or trailing you wherever you go. I just find it annoying to an extreme to play in Allanak and I can't really explain why.

Maybe it's too "gritty" for me, I feel like people are trying too hard to play hardasses, it all feels real fake to me.

Tuluk is nice, it's relaxing, it's a place where I can "relax" and not be constantly bombarded by farting dwarves who can't spell and an highschool cafeteria-like atmosphere.

[Nergal]

Not my idea, but I like it:

Keep Tuluk in the game, but make it completely NPC only and shut off to players. It's now an NPC threat against the loyal citizens of Allanak.

Tuluki citizens are now all fervently loyal and brainwashed to the point that they would throw themselves off a cliff without hesitation if it was for the good of the city.

NPC bands of Tuluki who are out grebbing or hunting in the southern scrub or eastern grasslands will run from or attack any PC they see because clearly they are not one of THEM.

Merchant Houses can come and go from a new gate opened in the wall of Freil's Rest, but are not permitted in other sectors of the city.

Everyone now plays in Allanak, Red Storm, Luir's, or the Tablelands.

Just as a test. Run it for a year, take that time to really streamline and simplify and tweak Tuluk's documentation. Everything chugging along fine? Clans booming? Keep the status quo. Everyone still bitching about missing their beloved Tuluk? Open it back up.


I've always been part of the "blow up Tuluk" club but the problem with destroying Tuluk is that now there is no check to Allanak's powers. From a game design standpoint there needs to be that check, and that threat. So - the solution is to make Tuluk an NPC, virtual reality instead of a player-character one.

The one argument I personally have against this particular idea is that right now, the Tuluk and Allanak scenario is one of the biggest driver of of player vs. player plots in terms of potency. It has the potential to get high-level plotters against each other and have it trickle down to other PCs on both sides. The main player argument against an NPC-based Tuluk, if there is any consistency at all in the playerbase's thoughts over the past few years, should be that an NPC-based Tuluk will be railroaded to all hell in terms of the plots that come about it. At least as things stand now, players have a substantial amount of control over conflict on both sides. An NPC Tuluk would de-legitimize that conflict because it becomes a players vs. staff scenario that players will ultimately feel bad about because of "staff control". It's in the game's best interest to invest as much control of conflict into players as possible, not only to keep things interesting and to keep the stakes high, but to keep it fair from a gameplay perspective. Because when it comes down to it, NPCs can just be created over and over without minds or a story of their own. PCs have a lot more to put in to the game, and more to lose.

[valeria]

I voted that I would probably still play but be upset because I enjoy switching back and forth between Allanak and Tuluk (and only occasionally other places).  I've probably spent more time in Allanak because I've had a couple more long-lived characters there than I've had in Tuluk, but I like the different atmospheres that the different areas present.

I usually put most of my high-concept characters in Tuluk and my low-concept characters in Allanak.  "What would it look like if the stress of leadership would make this character have a nervous breakdown" typically Tuluk.  "Byn, rawr" typically Allanak.

[Rathustra]

Just to be fair to the discussion at hand and to make it clear that even though I don't like the idea, I do not dislike the discussion about the idea:

The idea could be made more dynamic by having Tuluk's military and various antagonistic forces be played out in the same way that gith PCs were - as secondary/alternative/special characters that exist just to carry out missions. So Joe Templar is able to command a variety of NPC soldiers and take them on raids to bring the war to life. Similarly these roles could be used if we had major engagements occur as pitched battles across specially prepared battlefield zones - pick the time and place, then have the armies square up and duke it out, PvE style.

[Desertman]

I think we kind of did this before during the Allanaki occupation didn't we?

You could go to Freil's Rest...hang out in the tavern there....do a little trading in the local tent shops etc....but more or less the city didn't exist for players.

I personally loved it, but that might be newbie nostalgia as well. The entire area felt more hostile. More "Zalanthan". It felt like you were in a village on the edge of a dangerous and mysterious forest barely clinging to existence amongst the hostiles of those terrifying wooded depths.

We have about double, sometimes triple the active playerbase during peak times that we had then too, so there is that.

I would just be fine with Allanak finally winning the war and shitkicking Tuluk into a meager desolate existence on the edge of constant collapse. Not completely destroyed, but destroyed to the point of not being any sort of threat...maybe Muk Utep is killed....the northern templarate and Houses band together to eek out some semblance of order in the ruins as they are slowly reclaimed by the forest.

Things like that. Tuluk is no longer a great power, but the remnants of a great power long forgotten. They are no longer the bastion of the Sun King's light and glory. They are a ragtag consolidation of people living in the shame of their defeat just trying to survive on the fringes of a hostile horrible planet's environmental tortures.

Or we can keep doing the art and music thing too. I'm fine either way. There is just one I would enjoy more.

[nauta]

I sometimes hear the claims that Tuluk, not Allanak, has culture, that Tuluk, not Allanak, has fun noble and bard RP, that Tuluk, not Allanak, is where my PC concept fits... I'm curious if - under the wild assumption Tuluk disappeared - such RP/concepts couldn't work in Allanak, in, say, the nobles quarters?

[Fujikoma]

I don't think destroying Tuluk or rendering them powerless is a good idea. I'd sooner say nuke Allanak and kill Tektolnes because, really, I have to agree with Malken on the high-school cafeteria sort of interaction. Make Allanak a lawless area plagued with riots because, heh, no sorcerer king to protect you know, jerks. The rinth invades, east side and west side presenting a unified front of chaos, sweeping throngs of confused rioters into their ranks and plans for ceasing control. The Arm of the dragon fractures and units begin infighting amongs themselves because, just, who's in charge here? Nobles burned at the stake for their excesses. The streets littered with dull-black gems as the slave collars just, fall off, tinkling to the ground with the death of Tektolnes. The Templars remaining lose certain abilities but gain the gather skill, and become little more than thuggish gang-leaders amongst their loyal soldiers. Allanak is carved up amongst the surviving groups and turf wars break out on occassion. Tuluk laughs, watches, and sips tea from afar as everyone struggles to survive in an entire city that has basically just turned into the rinth.

Now THERE'S some grit.

[Reiloth]

As I stated in the Nobility thread/RAT, I most definitely would leave the game if Tuluk were arbitrarily closed/taken out of the game. I might come back and dabble now and again, but what got me hooked on Armageddon was Tuluk, its atmosphere, and culture, especially in juxtaposition with Allanak.

If you have nothing to compare Allanak to, Allanak becomes a very stagnant, boring place. Take out the Northie hate? Boring. Politics devolve to Rinth vs Allanak in a more serious way than it probably should, just because there is no conflict zone/center to point the finger at. Sure, a bunch of people are crammed together, but arbitrarily. Pushing people together unnaturally only creates arbitrary strife -- The kind of conflict that happens because there is no legitimate conflict, so people just make up their own conflict out of thin air.

Removing Tuluk naturally from the game, via plots, well...I would have more to say about that. At least it would be something that organically happened due to player actions and staff repercussions. The Rebellion/Ruins of Tuluk was just before my time here, but it sounded like a very interesting 'campaign setting' of sorts.

I just don't enjoy Allanak enough to justify me sinking my time into the game in the same way I do with Tuluk, and the enjoyment I get out of it. I'm getting older, and have more and more RL responsibilities that take away from my time playing ArmageddonMUD. Removing one of the pinnacles of my enjoyment of the game would be a major deterrent to me playing the game.

[Fujikoma]

I think bards having a monopoly on performances kind of, discourages certain potential RP in Tuluk that just seems, stifling and arbitrary. Monopoly on performances? Come on now, that warrens rat singing a silly ditty about the size of his endowments is no threat to cultural performances of the scope the bards are educated in, if anything, it provides a stark contrast, kind of like, Japanese wood-block print art for the masses and the more refined, cultural style for the aristocrats, each with their own merits and values, but intended for a different audience.

[Barzalene]

I've seen hundred in the last 14 years. Each one were hours of my life I can never get back. I hated every single one.

[Molten Heart]

It'd be cool if the game had the staffing resources to portray Tuluk realistically as a totally staff planned and controlled NPC/VNPC city, especially in a time of war. Currently I don't think that's realistic, but it's cool to consider the possibilities.

[senseofeven]

I don't think I'd want Tuluk to be off-limits. I like to have choices.

[Zoan]

I'd enjoy seeing a rotation, with places closed down. One year we're all in Nak, the other all in Tuluk, another all in the Tablelands etc. Not very realistic a function but it'd be amusing to see what a saturation of people can do to the areas.

[Barsook]

I don't think I'd want Tuluk to be off-limits. I like to have choices.

[Desertman]

I don't think I'd want Tuluk to be off-limits. I like to have choices.

Same.

[Armaddict]

I would play more.  And explore dem ruins.

[Jingo]

We should close down the known world and make Armageddon in space.

[bracken]

I have had hissy fits over less, though it still seemed a big deal
I am afraid that my emotions outweigh any logical thinkings. But I do enjoy the chance to immerse in two very different experiences, even more when I have a PC that may be resident in the enemy city.
I like interesting ideas , this one is too interesting and I don't want to think about it. Thank you.

More players please.

[Eyeball]

Why does my No vote have to be attached to an opinion of whether this is a good idea or not? My vote is No - there are arguments for and against and I am not an expert on either side of it.

Ok, I've added a "Just no" option.