Should Extended Mundane Subguilds be Karma-locked?

[BadSkeelz]

It also causes people to give up and leave.

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.  

The correct answer is yes to both.

Edit: The real question is which do karma-locked extended subguilds do more of: retain players or drive them away?

[Jingo]

I don't see the issue here. I don't think one karma is terribly hard to acquire for even the noobiest nub.

[BadSkeelz]

Most Extended are (currently) 2 or 3 as I recall. They can be acquired through special apps, sure. But why do we need to prove ourselves (and start over on a new character) so that we can submit a mastercraft for a clay bong?

[Nergal]

All extended subguilds are at the 1 to 2 karma level range, at the moment.

[hyzhenhok]

My oppinion: This thread has a bunch of text walls.

tl;dr of the "No" camp: karma-locked mundane extended subguilds are codified staff favoritism that provide no benefit to the game at large by being karma-locked. There has been no argument for why they should remain locked other than "power creep" and "Staff have already done a lot with the subugilds, let's not make them redo it again."

I find the power creep argument more compelling, if not convincing.

The power creep argument is not compelling, because people with karma can play these characters all they want. Even if we move to a regenerating CGP model, I average 3 or fewer characters a year and would have no problem slapping an ext. subguild on every character. Characters with extended subguilds are running around all over the place. All karma does with respect to ext. subguilds is guarantee that new players are not on an even playing field. If you want to restrict the presence of extended subguilds, karma is not a good mechanism for doing so. The restriction should apply to everyone.

[Quell]

Most Extended are (currently) 2 or 3 as I recall. They can be acquired through special apps, sure. But why do we need to prove ourselves (and start over on a new character) so that we can submit a mastercraft for a clay bong?

They were dropped recently actually. Now it ranges between 1 and 2 karma.

[Vwest]

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

[Lizzie]

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

You know this just seems like such a wrong reason to choose to quit playing. Why? Because you're assuming that "almost every other character in the game" will be superior to yours. Here's some actual facts:

Most full-guild mages die very early, to very stupid things, often involving their own poor choices. I don't see anything new happening on this front with the shift from main to sub.

If you are able to have a 100-day character, you will be "strictly and indefinitely [sic]" superior to most any guild with a mage subguild. On the other hand - what good is being codedly superior to other characters if you and they never interact with each other in combat? I mean if you're playing someone who you _intend_ to piss everyone off with, such that they put a hunt out on you, then yeah - being superior is gonna mean something. But you can only play those types so many times before you get tired of playing the target. And if you play the PKer every time, the staff might have something to say about that too.

Your fun, based on *your* criteria, will only change if you rely on the code to define your character AND if you rely on maxing your skills to define your sense of fun.

It sounds like you might have more fun in a more traditional H&S where guilds all are "balanced" and he who grinds the best wins.

[Jingo]

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

I agree and I disagree.

I agree because yeah, it sucks knowing you've been dealt the short straw. Especially so for a long lived character. And in particular knowing that some of players of this game revel in putting you at the other end of their power fantasy.

I also disagree that power comes from karma roles. I actually think leader pc's have significantly more power. And these pc's are typically mundane and rely on in game social structures more than code. They are more often than not untouchable by anything but mundane power too.

It's in this framework I have to wonder what the point of magick is at all in the game.

[Lizzie]

It actually causes them to play more, be more engaged, and have more fun.    I can't support that with any facts, but neither can you.

I won't be playing another character here once my current one dies.

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

I agree and I disagree.

I agree because yeah, it sucks knowing you've been dealt the short straw. Especially so for a long lived character. And in particular knowing that some of players of this game revel in putting you at the other end of their power fantasy.

I also disagree that power comes from karma roles. I actually think leader pc's have significantly more power. And these pc's are typically mundane and rely on in game social structures more than code. They are more often than not untouchable by anything but mundane power too.

It's in this framework I have to wonder what the point of magick is at all in the game.

For me the point is the same as it always was: a fun roleplay option. Nothing more or less. I enjoy(ed) it for the "neato" factor. Same reason I wanted to play a Lirathan templar (didn't get that role), a GMH merchant family member (got that), a bastard noble (got that), and a few other "neato" types of roles that aren't the typical warrior/thug Bynner or merchant/scavenger Kadian crafter.

I feel the people who put such value on these choices as "power" choices are missing the mark entirely. Yes, these options have certain coded advantages. But the player has to actually USE those advantages for them to BE advantages, and most characters don't live long enough to get that chance. The ones who do are few and far between and don't fit the criteria of VWest's complaint of being inferior to anyone who isn't mundane.

[Beethoven]

That wasn't Vwest's complaint, though, as far as I understand it. I think she was complaining about being inferior to anyone with a mundane extended subguild.

[Vwest]

It sounds like you might have more fun in a more traditional H&S where guilds all are "balanced" and he who grinds the best wins.

I'm not less of a role-player for having a mind for code or for having some enjoyment in that aspect of the game. This is a MUD, not a MUSH.

Try to keep up.

[Lizzie]

That wasn't Vwest's complaint, though, as far as I understand it. I think she was complaining about being inferior to anyone with a mundane extended subguild.

The point stands. The only way ANY guild or subguild will be superior to ANY other guild or subguild, is if the player uses it, against the other player. PK just isn't that common in Armageddon. It happens, but it's not all that common. The mentality that "I have to be codedly superior to other people in order for my character to be viable or fun" is a "wrong" mentality to have in Armageddon. You don't need to be codedly superior. This is just fact. UNLESS your idea of fun is being codedly superior. If that is the definition of your idea of fun in gaming, then RPIs are not a good match.

[valeria]

It sounds like you might have more fun in a more traditional H&S where guilds all are "balanced" and he who grinds the best wins.

I'm not less of a role-player for having a mind for code or for having some enjoyment in that aspect of the game. This is a MUD, not a MUSH.

This isn't the problem.  The problem is your assumption that the majority of other players play the game the same way as you do.  Quite of a few of us give no shits about coded power.  So your statements (emphasis mine)

The idea of investing another 100-150+ days played into a character that will be strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game doesn't appeal to me. The game is fundamentally based in code and the code is what dictates who wins, who loses and who escapes to fight another day. If I'm going to be stuck at a permanent disadvantage in the most basic terms the game has to offer, there is virtually no reason to keep investing my time.

are hyperbolic.

I've played a hairdresser for fuck sake.  My longest character ever had 50 days played or something and was a merchant/tailor (because I couldn't be bothered to branch clothworking).  Not everyone here is out there investing 100-150 days into amassing coded.  Not even the vast majority of people seem to be.  I'd say you're probably the exception if you're caring about amassing so much coded power, not the rule.  Such grand statements based on assumptions you have no basis of proof for ring hollow.

[MeTekillot]

I don't think so. If they started with higher skills, maybe, but as it is now all it does is give more things for you to possibly be good at if you invest time. That's like advanced weapon skills being karma locked.

[wizturbo]

So, yes, I can support my point of view with fact.

That's your view point.  There might be 2 other players who we keep around because of the way things are.  And I'm not talking about their direction perception of the system, but rather the positive effects it has on the game at large.  

I know when I was a newbie, the karma system was something that attracted me to the game and encouraged me to try harder.  It also does a fantastic job of filtering out players that might not be a good fit for Armageddon, powergamers, twinks, and the like.  The most powerful options are gained through roleplay, not through writing some l33t combat training script.  So it A)  Promotes good behavior B) Discourages players who aren't a good fit for this game...  Seems like a win to me.  

If anything, the Karma system reinforces a core tenet of Armageddon.  Life is hard, and things are unfair.  Your character will not be fairly treated.  It will have stats that are randomized, and might be weaker than others.  Even if the stats are better, and the guild/subguild option is the bestest available, they can easily be be "mistreated" by someone who was born into a role that puts them above that character forever.  For no reason other than they have the last name Borsail.  That's Armageddon.  It isn't a warm and welcoming place of fairness, and we don't want to attract players who are looking for that in a game.

If you want to play a character that is not "strictly and indefinitely inferior to almost every other character in the game" then put in your time and follow the guidelines and earn the 1 or 2 karma required to unlock these extended subguilds.  If that doesn't appeal to you, because you need to be as strong or stronger than everyone else from the get go, then maybe the system is working as intended.  These systems have been around for decades, and Armageddon's roleplay standards are leaps and bounds above everything else as a result...  It seems to work.

But anyway, with all that said...  Why not just special app if it bothers you?  Anyone can spec app any of the extended subguilds, so give that go, and maybe you'll earn the karma you need to not have to jump through that hoop by the time you've played through those characters.

[IAmJacksOpinion]

Interesting fact; my mother thinks I'm the most handsome player here. So suck on that, guys. But seriously, if your average character lasts 100-150 days, then you couldn't possibly use up all 3 of your spec apps in a year. (Unless you suicide for stats.) So, you're not really at a disadvantage.

I voted "yes" to this, but I probably really mean "other." Honestly, I still kind of wish extended subs were capped at 3 or 4 a year. Not via special app, but maybe some automated system of counting. Gated at only 2 karma, they're not really "extended" but rather the new norm for 80-90% of the active player base. And if that's the case, why have regular subguilds at all? They're more like a punishment for the new or consistently shitty. (I have more empathy for the former than the latter.) The way things are right now, I would agree with Vwest's assessment that these are just power ups for karma players, but....


... that could always change based on what's happening to main guilds. (Pls imms, just fix pickpockets and leave Brittney alone!)

[IntuitiveApathy]

I also voted other since we don't know what's coming down the pipe with the rest of the guild revamp.  In general though, I like that there remains carrots as opposed to just sticks.  I also am in agreement with Lizzie, in that coded power is not for a lot of players necessarily predictive of the enjoyment of playing Armageddon.

Another thought on the topic:

Characters with only subguilds as opposed to extended subguilds are somewhat less capable in terms of the range of things they can do and excel at than those that have them.  This might lead to some of these characters being encouraged (or forced, depending on your view) to interact more with other characters who can do these things that they need or want to do or have done.  This I assume, is one of the main arguments for the guild system in the first place.  For newer players, this sort of player engagement would hopefully help to promote good RP and learning of the social structures and other aspects of the game world.  Perhaps more importantly, it might even help to hook Ginka's claws in their pool souls, if someone gives them a great scene out of one of those interactions.

Has the introduction of extended subguilds lessened player engagement overall?  My guess is that it may have to a small extent, but I'm sure there's no way for any us to really know, nor would there be any way to quantitatively measure such a thing.

[wizturbo]

... that could always change based on what's happening to main guilds. (Pls imms, just fix pickpockets and leave Brittney alone!)

Yeah my money is on some guilds not mixing with extended subguild options.

[BadSkeelz]

I probably should have said that I expect Guilds, Subguilds, and Karma to continue to undergo review, and I conceptualized the question more along the lines of "If you had to make a decision today, would you keep Extended Subguilds karma locked?"

Because I would not at all be surprised if there's continued movement on the subguild front.

[Dar]

While it's true that there are many aspects in the game that does not involve skills, or code in any way, saying that a player should not take skills and code into a 'major' account is I think an incorrect way to approach this.

One doesnt have to engage in PvP to think that someone with extended subguilds is superior to them.

Consider two recruits joining Kurac. Both are warriors. One of the warriors is warrior/hunter. The other is a warrior/outdoorsman. Setting aside how interesting those characters are. How adept, how engaging, how fun, and how versed are they in use of common sense. Assuming that both are equal in all these aspects. Which of the two would be more valuable To a Kuraci Sargeant? I would say someone who demonstrated all these extra skills and talents and affinities.

Yes. It's true. Skills and coded prowess is not the only thing one judges about a character. But skills and coded prowess is still ONE of the things one judges about a character. To say that these concepts are irrelevant. To say that taking them into account means a player is too keen on Hack&Slash is, in my opinion, misguided.

[BadSkeelz]

While it's true that there are many aspects in the game that does not involve skills, or code in any way, saying that a player should not take skills and code into a 'major' account is I think an incorrect way to approach this.

One doesnt have to engage in PvP to think that someone with extended subguilds is superior to them.

Consider two recruits joining Kurac. Both are warriors. One of the warriors is warrior/hunter. The other is a warrior/outdoorsman. Setting aside how interesting those characters are. How adept, how engaging, how fun, and how versed are they in use of common sense. Assuming that both are equal in all these aspects. Which of the two would be more valuable To a Kuraci Sargeant? I would say someone who demonstrated all these extra skills and talents and affinities.

Yes. It's true. Skills and coded prowess is not the only thing one judges about a character. But skills and coded prowess is still ONE of the things one judges about a character. To say that these concepts are irrelevant. To say that taking them into account means a player is too keen on Hack&Slash is, in my opinion, misguided.

I'd actually take the Warrior/Hunter over the Warrior/Outdoorsman, since I'm not going to be picking the former's ass up off the sand every 3 rooms while riding.

[Dar]

That supports my point in equal measure.

[BadSkeelz]

More riding Extended Subguilds!


You could probably make a Raider ExSub pulling skills from Bounty Hunter and Outlaw.

[wizturbo]

I'm guessing the Kuraci Sergeant you use in your example could care less about whether one character is a warrior/hunter or a warrior/outdoorsman.   What's much more important on an IC level for them is the person's personality,, their ability to follow orders, their ability to encourage others, whether they are trustworthy...  You know...the stuff that actually matters?    OOCly speaking, they're wondering about how active you are, how fun your character is to play around, and whether or not you're playing during their usual play times.  I think what subguild this person has probably comes in pretty much last in order of priority.

I will however attest to BadSkeelz comment about the riding skill.  I fucking hate how disruptive bringing a new character along on anything out in the wilderness because they're unable to ride without falling behind every five seconds.  It makes me (and my characters ICly) not want to bring them anywhere.