A reasoned discussion of the current state of Armageddon vis-a-vis Olden Times

[Lizzie]

First of all, they aren't professionals. I don't know why that word keeps being pushed. What do any of you know about professional MUD admins? With very few exceptions - most of which are owned by only two companies worldwide - MUD administration is not a profession. And if you've ever played one of those professionally-staffed games, you'd see how utterly ridiculous your demands that our Armageddon staff be "professional" sounds. The staff here is far better than there. It's run better here than there. Even your least favorite staffer here, is exponentially superior to the least favorite staffer there. The atmosphere here is more like an interactive fantasy story, while there, it's more like a roadrunner cartoon.

The use of the word "professional" with regards to Armageddon staff is just as much a pet peeve of mine as pushing for "realism" in a fantasy game with sorcerers and humans who spar in apartments without managing to piss off the landlord.

Next, to the point:

This game is much different from what it used to be. It has different ownership, different administration, different player base. The overall theme is the same, but the rest just isn't. Remember that this game originated as a H&S. It wasn't always RP-intensive. In that, it's much better.

What some people loved about the past is the same thing that some people hated about the past. Personally, I never liked the concept of the Tan Muark. I never wanted to play one, and I really didn't like RPing with those characters. I also wasn't all that fond of the staff emphasis on them, the whole water-slide thing (yes, it's a euphemism, but it's still apt). The Tuluk bardic circles were treated similarly for a very long time, and I couldn't stand that either.

What I see now, is a shift away from the extreme, and a push toward the moderate. Unfortunately, moderation does not make for exciting game play. Although extremes did involve favoritism, focus on super-fantastical and the mundane becoming the perpetual underdog, it was much more exciting when that was the case. Now, my biggest enemy is probably just some chick who thinks I fucked her boyfriend, or the noble who didn't like the way I bowed to him. Back then, the enemy was fire and ash and defiling and evil incarnate and spooky shit and exploding backpacks.

Yes, the magick stuff was over the top. But that's pretty much the point of playing a fantasy game - to experience over the top.

I don't think the game is stagnating, I just think it needs to stop trying to balance itself and push the dial up more toward the extreme again.

[Taijan]

The spirit of Desertman's idea is good. It's been done before, in fact.  Whether it was successful or not isn't my place to say.  However, keep in mind that the decision to outright ban someone isn't made lightly.  As the reasons for each ban vary case by case, so do decisions whether or not to attempt to reach out and repeal a ban in place.

Furthermore, a number of bans are the result of the nth attempt at settling a disagreement failing to achieve satisfactory results by more "mature" means.

The onus is on staff to be professional.

While it is important for staff to be professional, your wording (unsure if it's intended this way) suggests that the player in the equation is excused from a similar expectation, which I couldn't disagree with more. Treating someone else horribly shouldn't ever happen unless mutual consent is given and one party is being well compensated for the experience.

[Malken]

My biggest enemy is probably just some chick who thinks I fucked her boyfriend.

Since this won't fit on my license plate, I'm totally stealing it for my sig!

[Ath]

I think all the big picture work you're doing on this is great, but if you want to constructive criticism, I'd suggest making it easier for aspiring indie clans to get real estate sooner, either by creating more warehouses, or creating trading company facilities.  There shouldn't be a super long waiting list to get facilities, the difficult part should be gaining political/social status and fending off the GMH's...not having a place to congregate and paying Nenyuk a boat load of coin for the privilege.

I have to agree with you on this one, but the issue is the limitations that places.  If we did it with the way the apartments are run, if someone doesn't show up to pay their rent on time, then a complete warehouse of goods is now available to the first bidder.  The way we do it now, if someone doesn't pay the rent, we wait, and if we don't do something, Nenyuk could (if we have to) seize the goods.  They could then sell it back to the person or whatever would happen in that incident.  While changing the code to do something like we need to perform some of these action could be difficult to do so.  Now you could say that if someone doesn't pay their rent, it's their loss... but I would hate for someone to just pay the rent and then get all the goods inside.  Nenyuk should take that stuff and put it on a merchant to sell off at a lower price to make a quick/easy profit.  Hmmmm... now -that- is an idea.  A merchant that sells the stuff people leave in their apartment.

Adding this:

I don't think the game is stagnating, I just think it needs to stop trying to balance itself and push the dial up more toward the extreme again.

YES YES YES YES YES!  But do you know what happens when you dial up the damage/death/harshness/kill/murder/death/betrayal/racism/hate/brains?  People cry, whine, bitch, complain.  I have made it a personal effort to make the game more harsh.  Here is what my staff avatar looks like...  sdesc: Darth Ath the Hatenator  Why?  Because I must let the HATE FLOW!  Mwahahahaah!

Just a bit tad over the top... yes.  Oh well.  Deal with it.

[whitt]

 A merchant that sells the stuff people leave in their apartment.

Elf Derail #378!

[Jingo]

Professionalism has nothing to do with accepting or putting up with abuse. That's generally where the problem comes in.

Being profesional is about creating working solutions. Squabbling with critics and putting them in their place is unprofessional.

Yes. But it's about doing what you describe in a certain framework. It's perfectly professional to disassociate someone who has no interest in following the rules or playing nicely.

Also I'm a critic of staff. I don't generally feel like I've been put anywhere or that anyone is interested in squabbling with me.

[wizturbo]

YES YES YES YES YES!  But do you know what happens when you dial up the damage/death/harshness/kill/murder/death/betrayal/racism/hate/brains?  People cry, whine, bitch, complain.  I have made it a personal effort to make the game more harsh.  Here is what my staff avatar looks like...  sdesc: Darth Ath the Hatenator  Why?  Because I must let the HATE FLOW!  Mwahahahaah!

Just a bit tad over the top... yes.  Oh well.  Deal with it.

They only bitch and moan when it's a staff avatar doing the murdering/death/betrayal thing.  Give the power to PCs.  Allow excellent, trusted players to play sponsored "villain" roles, with the expected levels of power.   I call them villains, but in reality, it's just "the opposition" of the city-states, or the "Templars" of the wilds.  We allow people to play sponsored Templars, who are pretty damn powerful, why not give the non-city states similar opportunities?

Maybe it's a d-elf sorceress, or a Nilazi Cult Leader/raiding party, a demon from another plane... whatever it is doesn't really matter as long as its motives are not aligned with the Allanaki majority of the player population.  It'll be a lot of work to support, but it'll be more controlled that full sorcs were if you give them power from the start, and grow their power as they achieve objectives, instead of just gaining it through training.

It'll add a sense of danger to the world, give something for the majority to fight and probably defeat.  But that's fine, villain roles are hard, and having high turnover in them is probably a good thing to give those players a break...  They won't mind, as long as it didn't take them 6 RL months to develop the villain by spamming spells in a cave somewhere.  Let them start with that power, and they'll burn brightly and then probably die...but leave plenty of cool memories behind for everyone involved.

Of course, all of this is highly dependent on having only the best players taking these roles.  Ones that can walk the fine line between playing a scary motherfucker, and not PKing gratuitously.

[Lizzie]

I think all the big picture work you're doing on this is great, but if you want to constructive criticism, I'd suggest making it easier for aspiring indie clans to get real estate sooner, either by creating more warehouses, or creating trading company facilities.  There shouldn't be a super long waiting list to get facilities, the difficult part should be gaining political/social status and fending off the GMH's...not having a place to congregate and paying Nenyuk a boat load of coin for the privilege.

I have to agree with you on this one, but the issue is the limitations that places.  If we did it with the way the apartments are run, if someone doesn't show up to pay their rent on time, then a complete warehouse of goods is now available to the first bidder.  The way we do it now, if someone doesn't pay the rent, we wait, and if we don't do something, Nenyuk could (if we have to) seize the goods.  They could then sell it back to the person or whatever would happen in that incident.  While changing the code to do something like we need to perform some of these action could be difficult to do so.  Now you could say that if someone doesn't pay their rent, it's their loss... but I would hate for someone to just pay the rent and then get all the goods inside.  Nenyuk should take that stuff and put it on a merchant to sell off at a lower price to make a quick/easy profit.  Hmmmm... now -that- is an idea.  A merchant that sells the stuff people leave in their apartment.

Adding this:

I don't think the game is stagnating, I just think it needs to stop trying to balance itself and push the dial up more toward the extreme again.

YES YES YES YES YES!  But do you know what happens when you dial up the damage/death/harshness/kill/murder/death/betrayal/racism/hate/brains?  People cry, whine, bitch, complain.  I have made it a personal effort to make the game more harsh.  Here is what my staff avatar looks like...  sdesc: Darth Ath the Hatenator  Why?  Because I must let the HATE FLOW!  Mwahahahaah!

Just a bit tad over the top... yes.  Oh well.  Deal with it.

Gimme sorcs and sekrit clans and "engineers" (nudge nudge wink wink to anyone who even remembers that reference in-game) and flash powder, and hell, why not - even toss a kank into the rinth alleys and blow the idiot up who dragged the poor schmuck in. He'll make a pretty red splash on those dreary mudbrick walls and we can call it art.

[Ath]

But players can already play villains if they want to.  There is nothing against them doing so, if anything I would encourage it.  Unless you are talking about staff supported in some way.  Which I can't get into details... but this has already happened.  The issue is you have to depend on a player to not die within the first week of playing the role.  The idea is there, it has been done, but execution of it may not always be visible to the players as a whole.  I love the idea, I think we should do it more... maybe I'll try to do something like that.  I appreciate the sentiment, I will remember it.

[wizturbo]

But players can already play villains if they want to.  There is nothing against them doing so, if anything I would encourage it.  Unless you are talking about staff supported in some way.  Which I can't get into details... but this has already happened.  The issue is you have to depend on a player to not die within the first week of playing the role.  The idea is there, it has been done, but execution of it may not always be visible to the players as a whole.  I love the idea, I think we should do it more... maybe I'll try to do something like that.  I appreciate the sentiment, I will remember it.

It's all about limiting the amount of skill training investment for a villain.  Your best outcome is a glorious death, and having to spend 6 months to the skills to be a threat is really tedious.  Let trusted players skip that part, and you've got a good formula for villainy.

[Ath]

But players can already play villains if they want to.  There is nothing against them doing so, if anything I would encourage it.  Unless you are talking about staff supported in some way.  Which I can't get into details... but this has already happened.  The issue is you have to depend on a player to not die within the first week of playing the role.  The idea is there, it has been done, but execution of it may not always be visible to the players as a whole.  I love the idea, I think we should do it more... maybe I'll try to do something like that.  I appreciate the sentiment, I will remember it.

It's all about limiting the amount of skill training investment for a villain.  Your best outcome is a glorious death, and having to spend 6 months to the skills to be a threat is really tedious.  Let trusted players skip that part, and you've got a good formula for villainy.

But we don't do that for Templars or Nobles, they have skills that they have to work on.  Why should we give an advantage right out of the box for a Villain?  I'm not trying to be condescending here, but I do like the input.

[MeTekillot]

Nobles have skills they're supposed to work on?

[Narf]

But players can already play villains if they want to.  There is nothing against them doing so, if anything I would encourage it.  Unless you are talking about staff supported in some way.  Which I can't get into details... but this has already happened.  The issue is you have to depend on a player to not die within the first week of playing the role.  The idea is there, it has been done, but execution of it may not always be visible to the players as a whole.  I love the idea, I think we should do it more... maybe I'll try to do something like that.  I appreciate the sentiment, I will remember it.

It's all about limiting the amount of skill training investment for a villain.  Your best outcome is a glorious death, and having to spend 6 months to the skills to be a threat is really tedious.  Let trusted players skip that part, and you've got a good formula for villainy.

But we don't do that for Templars or Nobles, they have skills that they have to work on.  Why should we give an advantage right out of the box for a Villain?  I'm not trying to be condescending here, but I do like the input.

MeTekillot sounds facetious, but he actually has a good point. You could wipe ever skill on a noble or templar's list except sirihish and they would still be terrifying to the average player. Add contact to the list and you nearly double that already tremendous power.

It's not really comparable.

That said, I do hear you on how much of a waste it can be to have a Plot oriented character die far too quickly to be worth the investment. I just don't think nobles are a good meter stick for less civilized antagonists (criminal and raiders) who are extremely dependent on their skills both for survival and success in their role. Those sorts need to be examined on a whole different scale.

[Rokal]

But players can already play villains if they want to.  There is nothing against them doing so, if anything I would encourage it.  Unless you are talking about staff supported in some way.  Which I can't get into details... but this has already happened.  The issue is you have to depend on a player to not die within the first week of playing the role.  The idea is there, it has been done, but execution of it may not always be visible to the players as a whole.  I love the idea, I think we should do it more... maybe I'll try to do something like that.  I appreciate the sentiment, I will remember it.

It's all about limiting the amount of skill training investment for a villain.  Your best outcome is a glorious death, and having to spend 6 months to the skills to be a threat is really tedious.  Let trusted players skip that part, and you've got a good formula for villainy.

But we don't do that for Templars or Nobles, they have skills that they have to work on.  Why should we give an advantage right out of the box for a Villain?  I'm not trying to be condescending here, but I do like the input.

I understand where they're comming from, but I also understand the need to let a villian grow.

When a villian grows, their villianous deeds start small, and slowly grow as they get more skilled, a villian can do more and more ,the only issue is ... well, Sometimes, it sucks to do this, because you cant' get to the true villiany right away, if anything, your nothing more then a minor bully, and people will step in and stomp it down before anything can be done, but if the villian is successful, it can make for awesome rp. ANother issue is that many players take upon the idea of a villian being a villan from the start, and this can set them up for failure right away, IMO anyway, when starting with a fresh character that has to build up skills, and is -my- preffered way to go about villany.

Theres also the issue of - all of that time invested, only to see it get crushed by something random, or some upstart happening. i kind of agree that people should be allowed to make more skilled out characters from the get go (outside of extended subguild apps) for the simple purpose of making those interesting situations ,rp ,and such. It simply saves a player time - most of hte players of arm dont have the time to invest in a game to skill up their characters non stop, in my experience. (i sure dont)

Creating a villian thats already 'ahead' allows for very fun plots to happen, all the same - but, in my experience roleplaying, it isn't as  (Not always though) deep as a successfully developed villian, but all the same, it cna make for  lots of fun stuff. Armageddon characters take a lot of time to develop to do the big things, and I thin kwhat some players are asking for are the chance to atempt the 'biger things' without having to spend six months of their effort being capable of doing them.

After all, people Rp for fun. a game that requires too much effort for the 'fun', isnt fun!

[titansfan]

The game is much different now than it was. Staff are more accountable for their actions, yes. Players are still accountable for their actions. Blazing infernos of doom no longer exist openly on a regular basis, good. Real dangers that drool ooze and spit venom now exit more openly, amazing. The game world is expanding on a level it hasn't for a long time, wicked sweet. Now all we need is to fix the city elf race and what it's possibilities are.

Fer realz though.....such a pain to play a race without any clans/tribes to join. But overall, I think the game is better in the idea that staff are more accountable now. However, certain aspects are still a work in progress which is expected and most likely will get worked out with the rate at which things are getting done these days.

I am by far not Staff's best friend, nor am I an enemy. But I applaud the work that has recently been done to try and improve/clean-up things in this game.

[Vwest]

It's all about limiting the amount of skill training investment for a villain.  Your best outcome is a glorious death, and having to spend 6 months to the skills to be a threat is really tedious.  Let trusted players skip that part, and you've got a good formula for villainy.

Every character is a villain to someone and a glorious death is the best outcome for every character.

If I have to earn every sliver of coded power my characters have, so should you and so should everyone else. What we do with that coded power is entirely on the individual and the risk versus reward factor, ie; is killing this PC and their time investment worth risking my PC and my time investment, should be enough to keep everyone's actions against each other measured and reasonable.

"Trusted player" is a really shady qualifier, too.

[Suhuy]

But we don't do that for Templars or Nobles, they have skills that they have to work on.  Why should we give an advantage right out of the box for a Villain?

Do role call bynner sergeants not get boosted skills straight out the box? If so, I imagine it's to facilitate a certain part of the game: in this case, a clan. And if not, its a wonder they can lead a bunch of mercenaries when they only have the starting skills of a 0 day ranger or warrior. Boosting a special app villain would be the same thing.

I suppose anyone can apply for something through the special app function as it is, but advertising for a role like this is sure to gain attention!

[wizturbo]

Every character is a villain to someone and a glorious death is the best outcome for every character.

Yeah, okay, semantics.   Villain isn't the key word, "opponent" is what I mean.  Opposing forces.  Raiders, rogue sorcerers, demonic cultist, slave rebellion leaders, spice smugglers, etc.  All of these kinds of roles have an extremely short life span if you're doing anything to actually stir up conflict.

If I have to earn every sliver of coded power my characters have, so should you and so should everyone else. What we do with that coded power is entirely on the individual and the risk versus reward factor, ie; is killing this PC and their time investment worth risking my PC and my time investment, should be enough to keep everyone's actions against each other measured and reasonable.

Coded power has never been equitably distributed.  Different classes are wildly more powerful than others on day one, and some have vastly different power progression curves.  Even amongst the same mundane classes, the difference between an AI strength warrior and an average strength warrior is enormous.  Some 10 day magickers can kill absolutely any mundane character in the game with virtually zero risk.  These characters haven't "earned every sliver" of that power, they were born with it.   Risk vs. reward is not what's keeping these character's actions measured and reasonable, the player behind the character is what's doing that.  

With that said, some roles which would add a lot of conflict to the game tend to have extremely short lifespans once they become publicly known (and thus, adding the conflict and fun to the game).  If it takes 240 RL hours of play time to make this character into something that's codedly dangerous (10 days played...which is just scratching the surface for most classes), and thus be able to take that conflict-generating path, you're asking them to sacrifice a tremendous amount of real life time in order to create that "opposition" in the game world.  Instead, they'll play it safe (and boring) and we'll have a lot of status quo every day.  Remove or greatly reduce the amount of time investment in order to create that "opposition" and you'll see a lot more of it in the world.

"Trusted player" is a really shady qualifier, too.

Naw, it isn't.  The same qualifier applies to plenty of roles already, be it a sponsored role or Karma restricted class/race.   I don't see why the same level of trust cannot be offered to a "villain" type.   A Templar PC can do a hell of a lot more harm than any villain, and can do so legally...

[Mordiggian]

I'm just going to very vaguely touch on some things I probably shouldn't be talking about because they're still cooking and I don't want to set a deadline or expectations on myself or any of the people I'm working with.

My currents projects include:

- Revamping/expanding a geographic area of the game on a scale that is really enormous not only in terms of the work required, but in what it will add to the game.
- Preparing a significant 'dynamic world' plot line/event for PCs and groups outside of Allanak, with an emphasis on a non-static outcome to allow for player involvement to determine what the resulting effects are
- Discussing potential ways players can be brought into the aforementioned event as 'sponsored' antagonists
- City elf clan. Nuff said.
- working with my team and another team to execute a dynamic world plot that is entirely the result of the actions and efforts of PCs in the past
- numerous smaller projects including crafting recipes for all items in clans I oversee, de-virtualizing existing wildlife, expanding/updating documentation of two clans I oversee to allow players to do some neat stuff


On the subject of red tape and additions/changes to the game:

Recently, a new PC joined one of my clans. Right off the bat, this PC raised the question of adding a room to the clan's holdings for a particular purpose and theme. I thought it was a great idea and I ran it by my boss (Rathustra). I communicated with the player where we would need to meet in the middle on certain aspects and ran it by the rest of my team. The PC in question submitted some descriptions for me and within a week the addition was built and in-game, and is now a permanent aspect of that clan and the clan documentation.

I've had PCs in my clans ask about <secret magic thing here> that arguably doesn't happen in this day and age. I raised the subject with Rathustra and the rest of the team, sought input from the producers, and determined that yes, the PCs may feasibly accomplish this with time, effort, good roleplay, and adherence to documentation.

I had a PC in a clan ask about getting a few items from an ancient, defunct clan loaded. The next day, I pulled the entire list of items for said defunct clan, updated and fixed typos and stat issues with over 30 of them, and added them to the list of available items for my clan.

A PC in one of my clans asked about setting up an RPT of their own design that would require a new, non-mastercraft object. I checked with my boss (Rathustra) and dialogued with the player to work out the details. Boom. Done.


Sometimes, this doesn't always happen like this. I've had PCs ask about <insert various other new things here>. With few exceptions, I don't click that decline button and go NOPE. If it's something I'm tentative about, I consult the rest of my team, and the player/s in question to see if it's workable in another iteration. Sometimes, the answer is no. I know that sucks sometimes to be on the receiving end of, but we have to accept that sometimes not everything we want is the greatest idea. This is true for staff as well as players. There's not a magic Aura of Agreement and Harmony in staff land. Sometimes (many times!) one of us has an idea, or goal, or process to achieve a goal that others disagree with. Sometimes, these things might get shot down. Sometimes we have to can an idea entirely, or put it on hold to revisit when the time is right. None of this happens because of someone in staff land saying "OH PLAYERS MIGHT HAVE FUN WITH THAT. NOPE." Sometimes, what might be fun for one player, or a group of players, may have a detrimental impact on many more players. Some changes or additions may have long term effects that we can't immediately identify, and even if we don't know what those effects will be, we have to consider their potential inception.

[Mordiggian]

p.s. Talia isn't gone gone. Real life is a thing, and real life obligations arise. Talia's pressing duties are covered by another immortal while she handles the real world, because it would be lame to just let that stuff languish.

[Patuk]

I'm asking this here and not ATS because there's a number of staffers who appear to read this thread, but do you actually need help in building a new celf clan? One month after I submitted the part one pocket edition abridged extensive docs of mine I ended up fleshing out another idea and wanted to hit myself for not submitting that instead.

I'd also not mind my old docs being reused, since I kiiiiiinda made those just to ensure they'd be viable even if the tribe would get coded. Said docs had some good ways to solve problems celf tribes might have, such as recruitment and whatnot.

[Vwest]

Yeah, okay, semantics.   Villain isn't the key word, "opponent" is what I mean.  Opposing forces.  Raiders, rogue sorcerers, demonic cultist, slave rebellion leaders, spice smugglers, etc.  All of these kinds of roles have an extremely short life span if you're doing anything to actually stir up conflict.

You're just plain wrong.

I've seen most of the above do very well for prolonged periods of time, all while being well-known centers of conflict. They aren't an every day success story, but they aren't supposed to be, either.

Coded power has never been equitably distributed.  Different classes are wildly more powerful than others on day one, and some have vastly different power progression curves.  Even amongst the same mundane classes, the difference between an AI strength warrior and an average strength warrior is enormous.  Some 10 day magickers can kill absolutely any mundane character in the game with virtually zero risk.  These characters haven't "earned every sliver" of that power, they were born with it.   Risk vs. reward is not what's keeping these character's actions measured and reasonable, the player behind the character is what's doing that.

Everyone should have to do the skill grind was the point I was making. You're being unnecessarily wordy and obtuse.

With that said, some roles which would add a lot of conflict to the game tend to have extremely short lifespans once they become publicly known (and thus, adding the conflict and fun to the game).  If it takes 240 RL hours of play time to make this character into something that's codedly dangerous (10 days played...which is just scratching the surface for most classes), and thus be able to take that conflict-generating path, you're asking them to sacrifice a tremendous amount of real life time in order to create that "opposition" in the game world.  Instead, they'll play it safe (and boring) and we'll have a lot of status quo every day.  Remove or greatly reduce the amount of time investment in order to create that "opposition" and you'll see a lot more of it in the world.

If I have to spend 240 hours of my time to have a character with 240 hours worth of power for my choice of Guild / Race, so should you and so should everyone else. If you want to spend yours being an in-your-face menace to people and end up dying young? That's your choice, but that choice should in no way entitle you to short cuts or extra benefits just because you think it adds more to the game than someone elses choice of character.

Naw, it isn't.  The same qualifier applies to plenty of roles already, be it a sponsored role or Karma restricted class/race.   I don't see why the same level of trust cannot be offered to a "villain" type.   A Templar PC can do a hell of a lot more harm than any villain, and can do so legally...

Yea brah, it is.

Everyone knows Karma is a crapshoot at best and a favor tool at worst, but if you want to approximate karma with trust, then you've already got a karma-based option for some minor skill bumps. If you think you need '240 hours' worth of skill increases to make a 'villain / opponent / gank4flavor' character viable, you're doing it terribly, terribly wrong.

Templar or noble roles are unique and not really relevant to the point I was making.

[Mordiggian]

I'm asking this here and not ATS because there's a number of staffers who appear to read this thread, but do you actually need help in building a new celf clan? One month after I submitted the part one pocket edition abridged extensive docs of mine I ended up fleshing out another idea and wanted to hit myself for not submitting that instead.

I'd also not mind my old docs being reused, since I kiiiiiinda made those just to ensure they'd be viable even if the tribe would get coded. Said docs had some good ways to solve problems celf tribes might have, such as recruitment and whatnot.

I'll tell you what, Patuk. Hit me with a request (use a Character Report and address it to one of the desert elf tribes) with suggestions/thoughts/input you might have about how a c-elf clan can be executed and I'll check it out. I can't promise that you'll get an in-depth response or a bunch of feedback on your ideas because I'm going to copy paste the contents to our IDB brainstorming thread and then close out the request. But I recognize that you might have some valuable input that could be factored into our internal planning.

Everyone knows Karma is a crapshoot at best and a favor tool at worst, but if you want to approximate karma with trust, then you've already got a karma-based option for some minor skill bumps. If you think you need '240 hours' worth of skill increases to make a 'villain / opponent / gank4flavor' character viable, you're doing it terribly, terribly wrong.

This is the only part of this post I want to respond to right now. We have a publicly viewable set of standards for how karma is awarded. We do not typically award more than one point at a time, or more than one point in a given period of time. My advice to anybody submitting a Karma Review request is to check out the categories for which karma is awarded, and make your case in your request for how you feel you have qualified in a given category.

[Eurynomos]

I tried to find more red tape but home depot was out of stock.

[Ath]

Everyone knows Karma is a crapshoot at best and a favor tool at worst, but if you want to approximate karma with trust, then you've already got a karma-based option for some minor skill bumps. If you think you need '240 hours' worth of skill increases to make a 'villain / opponent / gank4flavor' character viable, you're doing it terribly, terribly wrong.

This is the only part of this post I want to respond to right now. We have a publicly viewable set of standards for how karma is awarded. We do not typically award more than one point at a time, or more than one point in a given period of time. My advice to anybody submitting a Karma Review request is to check out the categories for which karma is awarded, and make your case in your request for how you feel you have qualified in a given category.

This ^^^ very much this.  Karma is going to be a work in progress for a long time.  I just suggested someone get their 8th recently and I justified it all by the categories, I asked other staff for feedback, other staff agreed, so I then awarded it.