PLEASE PARTICIPATE: Plot Satisfaction Survey

[solera]

The best thing about the Volcano plot was the way it seemed to re-polarize the relationship between Allanak and Tuluk. I like plots that shake up the way things are for the common PC.  Permadeathing Tuluk-the-way-we-knew-it is the supreme example.

[nauta]

I'm going to throw two more 'sids on the pile and say PVP plots are generally an excuse for terrible, terrible play.

Edit: This isn't to say "War plots" are terrible. I've had a lot of fun with them. But they require a lot of staff involvement to get the necessary pieces in place, which has its own downsides. Player versus Player conflict does not appear to be a very sustainable source of RP.

Can you expand on what you mean by 'PVP'?  I've found some of my most enjoyable plots to be 'PVP' in the sense of: antagonist A is out to MCB me.  This doesn't require staff involvement.  So you must mean something else?

PVE does require staff involvement, at least when the coded world isn't capable of responding.

[James de Monet]

The Volcano plot was very inaccessible, even for PCs at the templar/noble level who were otherwise usually in the know, other than the combat part of the HRPT. Noble and templar PCs tried to push events in various directions and very, very little came of it both before and after the HRPT. While an interesting concept as such, it was too railroaded and allowed for far too little PC influence. Far too much was done through NPCs. I play to be involved, not to be a spectator - even if that also certainly has its place in certain situations.

I don't want to get too IC, but is this comment from a Tuluki perspective?

[palomar]

The Volcano plot was very inaccessible, even for PCs at the templar/noble level who were otherwise usually in the know, other than the combat part of the HRPT. Noble and templar PCs tried to push events in various directions and very, very little came of it both before and after the HRPT. While an interesting concept as such, it was too railroaded and allowed for far too little PC influence. Far too much was done through NPCs. I play to be involved, not to be a spectator - even if that also certainly has its place in certain situations.

I don't want to get too IC, but is this comment from a Tuluki perspective?

Yes, a templar perspective. With "the Volcano HRPT" I mean the entire reshaping of the political scene in Tuluk, from diplomatic stuff months before the actual event and up to the merging of the Orders, Negean etc months after the event.

[Riev]

While I appreciate a nice, neat railroaded plot, I at least want to be along for the ride. I don't mind if there are only two endings, you get the princess or she is in another castle, as long as I get to play.

The Tuluki political scene wasn't a railroaded plot, it was more of an over-arching culture shift. Players were not "along for the ride" as much as "got to see the train passing by and everyone was drinking martinis". Its a major downfall of the "low fantasy" theme, where none of us are really "all that important" because, in the end, we ARE playing a game.

The volcano plot was a reminder that the staff own this game, there is a story being written BEYOND what the players interact with and can influence, and is basically like watching a movie, but you get to "play in the universe of the movie". Nothing you do is going to affect, or even touch at the majority of the story, but maybe some day the people in the movie will be giving a speech and you can be in the crowd.

[palomar]

Well if you don't know you are watching the train for six months it is probably going to leave a bad taste in your mouth when you realize nothing you did mattered because of the pending over all shift. I don't bear a grudge, I simply compare my experiences with different major plots and I really didn't enjoy the lack of meaningful involvement in regards to the Volcano stuff. And I don't even really expect to be able to have influence in most matters my PCs come across, not even as the templar I played during those times.

Edit to add: regardless of the high magick, the End of the world plotline was more fun to me because PC involvement had meaning, even if it had little or no impact on the final outcome. A different way to handle world changing events, and I know which one I prefer.

[Riev]

Well if you don't know you are watching the train for six months it is probably going to leave a bad taste in your mouth when you realize nothing you did mattered because of the pending over all shift. I don't bear a grudge, I simply compare my experiences with different major plots and I really didn't enjoy the lack of meaningful involvement in regards to the Volcano stuff. And I don't even really expect to be able to have influence in most matters my PCs come across, not even as the templar I played during those times.

]

Admittedly the deluge was super fun. From the building of the Arena just beforehand, to the incredible mismanagement of resources and planning. To Creek "saving" a few people because he shut the gates and it blocked some of the flood, only to get swept up in it himself, and helping to save some Templar.

I don't know that anything PCs did affected THAT plot, but it started a whole lot of stuff afterwards that was kinda neat for a while. Volcano plot was just a Pink Floyd laser show and a minor inconvenience.

[palomar]

The individual setting off the Flood was supposedly a PC, but you have a good point in that it set off a lot of player activity afterwards. There was a whole lot of activity throughout the years before the Flood, from the Copper war and on, that kept a large portion of PCs involved (and it was not possible to see how it was all connected, for non-staff). When that happens, it is fine with me if some stuff was basically predetermined.

[Taven]

Alright guys, we're in the home stretch now.

The poll will be open until sometime this evening, when I decide to close it.

If you haven't responded yet, today is your last chance!

[Reiloth]

To me, the best way to tell a story as a DM is to have large 'plot goals', things I want to accomplish moving forward, but allow the 'getting there' to either have the illusion of choice or the grandeur of choice. Most of the time, the illusion of choice suffices. Players make decisions that have flavor additions or alterations to things i've planned, or improv moments that I like better than the thing I did plan, so I roll with it. Some of the time, though, you can add gravitas to the things players do and really make their 'Choose Wisely' moment matter significantly.

I've been involved with a plethora of plots on ArmageddonMUD that are exactly this. I've had PCs that make decisions that seem to matter, but maybe don't beyond the flavor, or decisions that have made a lasting mark on the game world, even if it's something small like a room description change.

With this in mind, I think that with smaller-goal Plots that Staff are involved in, it's easier to make lasting impressions or have the illusion of lasting impressions (they may not last beyond your PC, for example). Larger scale HRPT types of plots, you shouldn't have the auspices that you are going to change the railroad tracks. You might be able to determine flavor things about the plot, but it will likely end at that. I can only imagine it would be a nightmare to cater to the improv and thoughts of all the players involved with an HRPT, when you really just want to accomplish X Y Z goal.

IIRC, with the Tuluki Light Show plot, the spy plot in Tuluk could have had several accounted for outcomes, and it just happened the way it did organically. They could have failed, they could have been discovered, but they weren't.

Anyways, just some speculation on plots and why large scale plots will almost never have the level of player input that players want, but smaller scale plots (IMHO) depend on player input. I think if we set our sights a little lower, we would be much happier overall with plots run by Staff.

Where i've seen it become particularly a sticky pickle is with long-lived PCs, especially Nobles and Templars. They tend to live so long, that everyone knows who they are between characters, and they seem to have accomplished quite a bit. However, there is the 'more, Oliver, more' syndrome where everything must be bigger and better than before, more building projects, more of this, more of that.

I really think we could all as a playerbase stop the passive aggressive 'my superiors said...' whining, that's basically a thinly veiled 'Staff is dragging their heels' or 'Staff said no to me'. Your superiors snubbed you? Deal with it! Kill them, find some new superiors.

Part of perhaps what bothers me about the request tool and character reports / IC questions to Staff via the request tool, is it takes you as the player out of the game, which blurs the line between OOC and IC almost immediately. Sometimes I question myself if this is an ICly motivated plot, or an OOCly motivated plot I am trying to stir up in the game. Just because I -can- come up with a plot, should I? Do Nobles/Leaders need to be 'doing things' all the time to be a well-played Noble/Leader PC? It reminds me of the Mastercraft System -- Just because I -am- a master in a skill, is it my duty to make a new object every month? Is this an IC goal or an OOC goal?

[James de Monet]

Yes, a templar perspective. With "the Volcano HRPT" I mean the entire reshaping of the political scene in Tuluk, from diplomatic stuff months before the actual event and up to the merging of the Orders, Negean etc months after the event.

Ah, I see.  That makes sense.  I asked because the "Volcano HRPT" such as it was in the South, was a very different affair, and there were a number of PCs that were very active in shaping it.  In a way, that makes sense, though, because the OOC goal of the plot was mostly centered in the North, so the Nakkis would have had a fair bit more latitude to create momentum in different directions, but still advance the plot.

[Riev]

Part of perhaps what bothers me about the request tool and character reports / IC questions to Staff via the request tool, is it takes you as the player out of the game, which blurs the line between OOC and IC almost immediately. Sometimes I question myself if this is an ICly motivated plot, or an OOCly motivated plot I am trying to stir up in the game. Just because I -can- come up with a plot, should I? Do Nobles/Leaders need to be 'doing things' all the time to be a well-played Noble/Leader PC? It reminds me of the Mastercraft System -- Just because I -am- a master in a skill, is it my duty to make a new object every month? Is this an IC goal or an OOC goal?

I will say that it seems to be a skill some staff have to hone. I've had some staff VERY good about saying "Your Sergeant would say" or "The Red in charge suggests" if it is something for keeping IC, IC. Honestly, rarely do I get something back that says "I think it would be a bad idea if..." unless I was asking for advice and even then, most staff don't tell me how to play.

My issue with it all is that if my boss tells me its a bad idea, I generally assume its a "You'll be killed so don't do it". Like, do I do it because its fun, a game, and it'll stir something up? Or do I RP it out as "I wouldn't do it because my boss said its a bad idea"?

Related to Mastercrafts, I don't think you HAVE to submit something every month (unless you have customers lined up and are in a Merchant House). But I know the FEW times I've submitted a MC, its got IC and OOC bends to it. Like, I want to make this thing ICly, but OOCly I want it to be somewhat convoluted so I'll do it THIS way...

[Lizzie]

Part of perhaps what bothers me about the request tool and character reports / IC questions to Staff via the request tool, is it takes you as the player out of the game, which blurs the line between OOC and IC almost immediately. Sometimes I question myself if this is an ICly motivated plot, or an OOCly motivated plot I am trying to stir up in the game. Just because I -can- come up with a plot, should I? Do Nobles/Leaders need to be 'doing things' all the time to be a well-played Noble/Leader PC? It reminds me of the Mastercraft System -- Just because I -am- a master in a skill, is it my duty to make a new object every month? Is this an IC goal or an OOC goal?

This has been and continues to be my biggest complaint about the request tool system. For quite awhile, I had to actually preface character reports with something like "The following is a report, from Lizzie, about the goings-on of my character. If my character is needing IC info I will notate it as such" because I had such a nasty bitter taste in my mouth when a staffer would tell me via request response what my character had permission to feel/think/do even when I didn't ask them.

Things have gone MUCH more smoothly within the past year, but it is still a bitter pill I don't enjoy taking. If my character wants to know something from her superiors, I'd much prefer she ask them in game. If that means a staffer needs to take 5 minutes out of his day in game instead of 5 minutes out of his day to type out a request response, so be it. I appreciate that we're not all available at the same time all the time, but there are more than one staffer on each clan roster. At some point during the dozens of hours I put in every week, surely one of them has time to animate a clan boss and tell my character to take a hike, or sure, go ahead and kill Lord Fancypants, or no, you can't blow up Tuluk because we need it, but talk to Amos because he has some ideas that would work.

[Cayuga]

It actually depends on the staffer, and how flexible they are in terms of schedule or desirous they are of having another staffer do such a thing for them. It's not as black and white as you make it seem, Lizzie. We would all love to be able to tell people things in game. Some of us simply aren't that available.

[Taven]

Just FYI for everyone, I have CLOSED the polling.

I will be reviewing all of the results and making colorful graphs and charts for you to look at, so stay tuned.

In the meanwhile, please feel free to continue discussing.

[Reiloth]

It actually depends on the staffer, and how flexible they are in terms of schedule or desirous they are of having another staffer do such a thing for them. It's not as black and white as you make it seem, Lizzie. We would all love to be able to tell people things in game. Some of us simply aren't that available.

Or, available at the time you are, as you pointed out. Or to have to sit there for 45 minutes while you pontificate and report. I mean, just playing Leadership PCs, I can commiserate with Staff on the point of hearing your minions report for like an hour...And then having another minion show up and have to hear a different version of the same thing. Kill me now! I wish I had a Request Tool sometimes.

While I miss parts of the old report in-game system, I do appreciate that everything is accountable and I can look it up. There's aspects I like of the Request Tool, I just wish I could do it in game, sort of like writing in a book.