The Plot Satisfaction Thread

[LucildaHunta]

I've struggled whether to respond to this or not, but I'll put it out there anyway.
Over the years, I've been a part of large scale plots and small scale plots and to state the obvious: plots are the lifeblood of the game. From looking at the charts, it appears people aren't happy with plots in general. This is bad, but I can't say I'm surprised either. This isn't finger pointing, it's just my perspective as someone who plays when she can.

Feedback:
It's a mixed bag, plain and simple. I get the idea of player reports and don't have a problem doing them. But sometimes the responses I get to them can range from a lengthy reply to "THANKS". Regardless of the output, I'm feeling like I'm not sure I'm on the right track, I'm not sure if my staffer would like to see me try something,I'm not sure if I'm doing something I'm not supposed to...I'm just not sure. I just feel like this form of feedback isn't working like it should and it would go a long way in helping some plots along.

Plottage
I've had characters going way back to the copper war and that's not a brag or a the way we were statement. It's just to say I've participated in a major plot line it had a beginning middle and end. Again, I'm not pointing fingers, I joined the plot knowing my character probably wouldn't survive and I was ok with that. And she didn't, I was unhappy when it happened but it was an acceptable conclusion. Sometimes now, I'm not sure where the plot line concludes, whether I should try to follow up with something or if I should just let it go.

I've also been in situations where there's been pcs, sitting in a room saying "umm...what do you want to try? Nope...tried that." If that happens, why not jump start the clan with some one off event?

Guidelines/consistency

I enjoy random events and I'm sure I've been on the receiving end of some interesting animations. Those are great, I truly love those! Sometimes I see something happen or someone says something and I think That would be a cool plot. Should I write a report? Should I send a separate mail saying Hey! Cool plot idea inside! Should I continue to rp it, try to get others involved and hope I get noticed? I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels uncertain on how to turn an idea into a plot. I'd like to do my part as far as plots and do more, but there isn't really one place to read an official way to begin a plot.

I hope this can at least jump start some discussion, even if it's to disagree or advise.

[Lizzie]

On the feedback thing, I get what you're saying, though my perception of it is a little different.

I generally avoid regular reports unless it's for a sponsored or leadership role. I do try and send an occasional "BTW here's what's been going on with my PC" from time to time.

But unless I have actual questions or concerns, or there's something going on that the staff needs clarification about, I never expect more than a "Thanks for the report" from the staff. I'm satisfied with that answer, as long as there's no questions/concerns on either side.

The only time I am -not- happy with a simple acknowledgement of my existence, is the dreaded response "Noted." I hate that. It's perception - but it just "feels" like a curt brush-off. Thankfully those are few and far between, these days. It used to be a regular thing and it really turned me off to reports even more than I was already turned off by them in the first place.

[Taven]

1. How to read the charts?  (Taven, correct me if I'm wrong.)

Large world changing plots: 33 people who were "very interested" and also pursued this type of plot.

Small world changing plots: 44 people who were very interested and who also pursued these plots.

These graphs don't count people who were very interested but did not pursue that type of plot. It also doesn't count people who were "somewhat interested" and pursued this plot type.

Second, the questions put to these were all about your ability to pursue a plot: in general (first column), how much PC support you perceived receiving in pursuing the plot (second column), how much staff support you perceived receiving (third column).

Ok, hopefully that clears things up.  (So it isn't an issue of PC-plots vs. Staff-plots, which is what I at first thought.)

It's not necessarily about how MUCH support you received, but rather your satisfaction with the support received. Quality instead of quantity.

2. Large Scale Plots

Almost nobody (1-3 people) is satisfied -- neither in their ability to pursue the plot, nor in the amount of support they perceive other PCs given them, nor in the amount of support they perceive staff given them.  That's ... just very interesting.

Something to bear in mind is that the poll only had three levels. "Very satisfied", "Content", and "Dissatisfied". People who were generally satisfied but could still see room for improvement may have picked content. If I was to re-do the poll, I would have five different levels (very satisfied, moderately satisfied, neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied) as I think that would yield more accurate results.

All of that said, I think that the numbers of "very satisfied" being abysmally low in large-world changing (to the tune of about 3%) is something to take note of, discuss, and brainstorm ways to improve.

Small Scale Plots

With small scale plots, well over half are satisfied or content with our ability to pursue plots and the amount of support we receive from staff and players.

I'm not terribly sure what the take away should be, or, for that matter, if there should be a take away (again, with surveys like this, it is often the extremes who respond).

This may help you when considering what everything means, from the original thread:

Here are the definitions of what is in the survey, if you find it helpful:

Large world-changing plots: Typically something that has more ripple effects. Historically, any sort of war between cities would quality here. Things which affect multiple locals might apply here. Things which have a definitive lasting impact, that would make the history page or alter documentation.

Small world-changing plots: Admittedly, this has a wide range. Generally, this would involve something small changing a local area. Perhaps adding a new shop in an area, securing a minor treaty, or progressing to an MMH (which feels bigger, but in the scheme of things is not).

[Taven]

(stuff)

This is what I got out of your post:

1. You would like responses to PC reports from staff to say if they'd like you to try something or, on the flip side, if you're doing something you're not supposed to
2. You don't feel like you currently get a lot out of PC reports
3. You have certainty as to when current plots are finished or if you should be following up or not
4. You feel that when PCs are out of ideas for plots, they would benefit by staff making an event happen, that would then generate plots
5. You would like clarification on the best way to turn an idea into a plot

Is that correct? If so, I can respond to some of these points, I just want to make sure I'm reading you right. 

[LucildaHunta]

That's mostly right, yes.

Except #3, sometimes I'm not sure if a plot is finished.

#4 or a general nudge in the right direction.

I'd also like to add, what happens when you find yourself in a clan with no active leadership? I'm certain this is a thing that occurs for different reasons, i.e. Different playtimes, leader stopped logging on, etc.

I guess what I'm asking is what can someone like me, who has limited time to play do to help plots along or create them.

[Taven]

I guess what I'm asking is what can someone like me, who has limited time to play do to help plots along or create them.

For general plot involvement ideas and suggestions, take a look at this thread.

Some take aways from that:

• Even if you have limited playtimes, try to play at consistent times when you do play
• Finding a clan that has players who play when you do (especially if leaders play when you do)
• Making your PC interesting with their own goals as well
• Being helpful, friendly, and useful to other PCs (develop those relationships!)

1. You would like responses to PC reports from staff to say if they'd like you to try something or, on the flip side, if you're doing something you're not supposed to

What I do in my reports is I include a question section, right at the top. If you're curious about a specific thing you're trying to do or attempt, you can ask for feedback. You can ask for OOC feedback (IE how you're doing or staff advice as staff) or IC feedback (IE asking your IC superiors via report for their thoughts).

2. You don't feel like you currently get a lot out of PC reports

For this point, would you like to outline a little more as to what information you provide in reports? That may better enable me to help offer advice.

3. You're not sure if plots are finished or if you should follow up

Well, there's a few options here. Essentially, lots of plots can be taken a step further, since Armageddon is a story-based game. Even if staff didn't intend something to go a certain way, you have a lot of flexibility to take things in a new direction. I would say ask yourself: Did I accomplish my objective?

The other option is just to communicate more with staff about your confusion or questions. As long as you are fairly concise and don't ask too much, they will usually be polite about their responses.

4. You feel that when PCs are out of ideas for plots, they would benefit from staff nudging them in the right direction, or making an event happen that would then generate plots

I think this is something that a lot of people feel. The issue is that more plots can happen when reacting to something, or when following up on an idea or direction... But sometimes if nothing new is happening, it can be hard to make a change.

5. You would like clarification on the best way to turn an idea into a plot

If you want to give me a fake idea that you'd like to see become a plot (rather then something you are actually working on), I can outline how I would recommend doing it.

[Inks]

I don't think you got the point of the thread and your post is barely legible.

[Taven]

I don't think you got the point of the thread and your post is barely legible.

I think I got the point of the thread and your post is not at all helpful.

Do you care to actually contribute to the discussion at hand?

[Riev]

4. You feel that when PCs are out of ideas for plots, they would benefit from staff nudging them in the right direction, or making an event happen that would then generate plots

I think this is something that a lot of people feel. The issue is that more plots can happen when reacting to something, or when following up on an idea or direction... But sometimes if nothing new is happening, it can be hard to make a change.

To go along with this, if the players in leadership roles have a hard time coming up with ideas, staff often do come up with ideas that THEY would like to see pursued. But there is a disconnect, because when a player HAS an idea, it kind of requires that their staff agree that its a good idea, agree that it makes sense in the world, AND has time to do their side of things.

I'm not saying they are lazy, what I'm saying is that the system inherently stacks against the players. A lot of "Makes sense IC" ideas are BORING. Many "This would be super fun for all involved" make absolutely no sense for that clan, or for the game in general. Everything in the middle has been done before.

Which is why we need fire kanks.

[Taven]

To go along with this, if the players in leadership roles have a hard time coming up with ideas, staff often do come up with ideas that THEY would like to see pursued. But there is a disconnect, because when a player HAS an idea, it kind of requires that their staff agree that its a good idea, agree that it makes sense in the world, AND has time to do their side of things.

I'm not saying they are lazy, what I'm saying is that the system inherently stacks against the players.

I think you make a really good point about player-generated plots. But I would argue the steps are actually even more complex and stacked against players. Here's an example of the process:

• You propose the idea to staff
• 1 week later, staff respond to the report about the idea
• You work with other people in your clan to work on your end of things and update staff
• 1 week later, staff respond. Let's assume you're good for step #2.
• You approach other people in other clans that you need to have help make the plot happen
• 1 week later, you follow up with your contact, and they tell you they have heard nothing
• Another week later, you follow-up again. At this stage, there is no way to tell if the other player's clan staff are slow to respond or if they are merely delaying you. You also have to trust that whatever they say is actually what their NPC leaders said (not always the case)
• Assuming you make it past the huge hurtle of step #2, you can proceed to step #3. In a combat-focused plot, this can mean coordinating times. In a political plot, this can mean negotiations.
• 1 week later, confirm with staff that times are good for RPT (if combat plot). If political plot, get response back from staff about proposal, or ask if other party has heard back. If hearing back from other people, the same communication troubles ensue

This is also assuming that you're a leader in your clan. If you're an underling looking to get approval from a leader for a plot... Whew.

And this isn't all hyperbole. I've actually experienced this on multiple plots more, which caused a lot of them to stagnate and go nowhere.

Here are some possible solutions:

Make it a hard rule that reports should be answered in a week - If one staffer can't do it, another one should pick it up. If there's something wrong about a request or report (too many questions, unclear format), then communicate that to players in a polite and friendly manner. If there's a plot you know will need more intensive responses (negotiating treaties), find a way to set that up so that there will be fast responses, to avoid dragging it out.

Make an approved way to tell if PCs are lying to you about if they asked someone something (or have leader NPCs punish them if they're caught delaying) - I'm not saying that I want to work with NPCs for plots. I'm saying if a PC tells you "my NPC boss hasn't answered me yet" which is a thinly-veiled "staff haven't responded yet", you should be able to ask a vNPC if this PC even proposed the plot. Multiple PCs will lie about this, and they'll lie multiple times.

[nauta]

I like these points.  The last could be done via the CC feature on the request tool (which might still be broken).

I've sometimes thought one thing that might help is if staff posted in the 'absence' thread of a clan.  Then, at least, we could pursue non staff-driven/required plots while the staff is away.  I had an experience where our main staff in a clan just disappeared, completely, for a month without a word.  I've also had many times where a single month can rotate through three staff.

I also wonder if staff posting their (rough) play times would be good (American / European / Asian roughly).  Then you know that you are in a clan with Australian rules staff and should flee!

[nauta]

I guess what I'm asking is what can someone like me, who has limited time to play do to help plots along or create them.

For general plot involvement ideas and suggestions, take a look at this thread.

Some take aways from that:

• Even if you have limited playtimes, try to play at consistent times when you do play
• Finding a clan that has players who play when you do (especially if leaders play when you do)
• Making your PC interesting with their own goals as well
• Being helpful, friendly, and useful to other PCs (develop those relationships!)

This is the paradox of Armageddon: in order to get involved in plots you can't be an unhelpful, unfriendly jerk.  Yet in order to have conflict, you have to have unhelpful, unfriendly jerks.

[Delirium]

Solution: characters that are friendly to some, jerks to others. There is plenty of racial and societal strata to play with.

[Armaddict]

Solution: characters that are friendly to some, jerks to others. There is plenty of racial and societal strata to play with.

Also 'nice'.  Help people, do favors, but be kind of a dick when it comes to needing favors in return.

People can be helpful and friendly and still insist that nothing is free.

[Taven]

I like these points.  The last could be done via the CC feature on the request tool (which might still be broken).

I think you can CC one clan but not two?

I've sometimes thought one thing that might help is if staff posted in the 'absence' thread of a clan.  Then, at least, we could pursue non staff-driven/required plots while the staff is away.  I had an experience where our main staff in a clan just disappeared, completely, for a month without a word.  I've also had many times where a single month can rotate through three staff.

This could help, but possibly more useful is control staff side. For example, letting other staff know you'll be away and if there's any active plots you're working on. A lot of times Admins can step in for Storytellers... However, if an Admin is away a lot of times things just don't go anywhere. Maybe better communication on that would be useful.

I also wonder if staff posting their (rough) play times would be good (American / European / Asian roughly).  Then you know that you are in a clan with Australian rules staff and should flee!

I think this would only encourage people who behave twinkishly, sadly. Generally if you have a need to set up an animation they will be pretty flexible about scheduling via request tool, though. I've had a lot of good luck with staff on that.

[LucildaHunta]

Taven, that was helpful and a lot of things to think about and try.

Thank you. 

[Taven]

Taven, that was helpful and a lot of things to think about and try.

Thank you. 

You're very welcome. Let me know if you have any more questions! 

[Inks]

I apologise for my earlier post. Ironically I was posting negatively against negativity.

I would like to see another poll in a few months to compare please. I also feel like gdb polling only represents a subset of players.

Sorry about the snipe Jihelu.

[Taven]

I would like to see another poll in a few months to compare please. I also feel like gdb polling only represents a subset of players.

I'll probably do another poll in a few months, but I'll change the scope of it. The last one was too big and tried to address too many plot types. I'd also like to add more then three options for satisfaction levels, as mentioned.

While the GDB is a fairly small subset, the people who answered the last poll were around 70+. The reason the number in the graphs are smaller is because only a fraction answered "very interested" and also pursued the given plot types.

[nauta]

I would like to see another poll in a few months to compare please. I also feel like gdb polling only represents a subset of players.

I'll probably do another poll in a few months, but I'll change the scope of it. The last one was too big and tried to address too many plot types. I'd also like to add more then three options for satisfaction levels, as mentioned.

While the GDB is a fairly small subset, the people who answered the last poll were around 70+. The reason the number in the graphs are smaller is because only a fraction answered "very interested" and also pursued the given plot types.

Thanks for the hard work.  I'm still (for professional reasons) dubious about polls as stated above.

But here's a question:

Does this mean that OVER HALF (37/70) of our playerbase is not very interested in large-scale plots, and that just under half (26/70) of our playerbase is not very interested in small-scale plots?

What... are they interested in?

[Riev]

Its important to mention the lack of granularity again, as Taven already mentioned.

There was "not interested", "somewhat interested" and "VERY INTERESTED". When given extremes like that, the average populace is likely to select the less-extreme option closest to how they feel. I am not 'VERY INTERESTED' in large world plots, but I'm definitely interested in seeing them happen.

His data in this thread is only related to the "very interested" subset.

[Miradus]

This is the paradox of Armageddon: in order to get involved in plots you can't be an unhelpful, unfriendly jerk.  Yet in order to have conflict, you have to have unhelpful, unfriendly jerks.

Yes!

As an unhelpful, unfriendly jerk, can I lend some advice on this?

1. Plant seed. - Do nice stuff for people occasionally, but not overly friendly about it. "Ha, you filthy scrub. You don't look like you could greb a diamond if it were stuck up your ass. Here's a small from the best grebber around. Go get some water and a whore, you scrub." People will remember you interacting and being helpful. They'll also consider you're probably a decent player who could help them out in better ways.

2. There's a difference between being crass and being a jerk. Don't dominate the room. Give the other players opportunity to talk and roleplay out their characters and respond in short bits. Give other players equal billing in your own private drama ... don't make them stand-in extras for your own show. They've all spent time crafting their cyber-persona and giving them room to shine will make them want to play with you more, even if your character is an ass (mine often are).

3. Don't betray little. Betray big. If they tell you a small secret, don't run off to tell everyone right away. Wait until they tell you a really big secret. Because by that point they're really just feeding you a plot-hook and hoping you'll run with it.

As a fully-fledged expert in being an asshole (lots of real-life experience to draw upon), I could give out an easy 30 more tips, but 3 is enough to start with. I would consider this to be the "Indie's Guide to Being an Asshole", since if you're in a house/clan/group you're pretty much stuck with the assholes around you.

[boog]

I feel like this thread is, like the other one, pointing specifically at the shoulders of staff to wear this weird burden of stagnation. We're not omipotent as players. We don't know what staff are or aren't doing, to many degrees beyond our own play.

I want to ask what we as players are doing and how we're going to fix the stagnation. If 90% of the staff were sick with the flu, what the fuck would we do for a week? Sit on our thumbs?

[Riev]

I want to ask what we as players are doing and how we're going to fix the stagnation. If 90% of the staff were sick with the flu, what the fuck would we do for a week? Sit on our thumbs?

Considering the actually huge amount of work they put into the game? Some people probably would. Personally, I try to keep staff out of my gameplay as much as possible, but sometimes you just need an animation, or to talk to someone but no PCs are around.

Stagnation is going to occur, because we all only have so much creativity, before someone links TVTropes.Org to every plot idea. Everything has "been done before", and a lot of what HAS been done before, isn't allowed to be done anymore under new restrictions and guidelines.

[Reiloth]

I feel like this thread is, like the other one, pointing specifically at the shoulders of staff to wear this weird burden of stagnation. We're not omipotent as players. We don't know what staff are or aren't doing, to a degree beyond our own play.

I want to ask what we as players are doing and how we're going to fix the stagnation. If 90% of the staff were sick with the flu, what the fuck would we do for a week? Sit on our thumbs?

It seems so, or at least the onus is a bit of a catch 22. Staff can't do anything without players, players can't do anything -meaningful- without Staff. Now, I use that word very loosely (and it's involved with this 'Plot Satisfaction' idea).

I have been perfectly satisfied playing without Staff involvement with many of my PCs. Before the request tool, we didn't even have a reasonably easy way to communicate with Staff, so you rarely did so. You knew Staff were around, they might be animating, but even if you were a leader, you mostly communicated by email and sometimes didn't even get a response, ever (!!!).

The disconnect here is...It was a little more fluid, a little more in the box (in the game), and less outside of the game, less meta. You found out if your idea was liked by the House via a Boss animation. You didn't arrange a time, you didn't report about your idea OOC/IC, you didn't go through all of those motions. You might shoot an email to your Staff saying 'Hey, Lord Soandso is going to try and enslave all the ratlons. Here's how he's going to try to do it. Does the House support him or want him to fuck off?' And your answer would come through IC means, IC channels, not an email typically or OOC communication.

I think when Staff moved away from the IC means IC Channels to the Request tool, one of the unfortunate byproducts was this emphasis on Players to pursue Staff in order to get approval for things that they do, before they try to do them. So they mention it in a report, Staff gets to comment on it, tweak it, ok changes are made, now the plot is executed in game. It creates a reliance on Staff to move things forward, whereas before it felt that things were moving forward with Staff in observance and guidance. It felt much more nuanced and just inside of the game. The request tool has changed that paradigm, to make Staff the arbiters of change.

No, I don't think it should necessarily be that way. I think that players should be empowered (or seemingly empowered) to make massive decisions that trickle down to the plebeians. But, I think with how things are working now, with 'No/Few Boss Animations', and relying on the request tool as almost half of the game for Leaders, that we are working with what we've got. In order to effect change beyond the minor, Leaders rely on Staff to support and co-author their work.

I don't know if there is an answer to this, or if there's even a question. Staff are the Leaders of the Leaders. So yes, they do not know what Staff are or are not doing (especially behind the Iron Curtain, where Staff work on projects and announce them when they are complete, not while they are in progress). Players have constantly projected what they 'think' Staff are doing or what they are working on, or more often, what they are not working on. But we should patently realize that Staff are responsible for changing the world (I mean actually effecting the changes we as Players might start). We as players cannot build rooms, we can't build NPCs. We can't create objects, and we can't create new zones. We can interact with the phenomena available to us, and we can spur that phenomena to create new phenomena, but we aren't the Gods. They are.

People look to their Leaders for guidance and to take cues on how to proceed. I think that's the basic relationship between Players and Staff. I think Staff exist to enforce the gameworld environment, make sure that documentation is upheld, rework documentation that is aged and past its prime to update to the new game environment, build NPCs/objects/rooms surrounding plot ideas, support player plots, create their own stories within the world, and remain mostly invisible (and unthanked) for the majority of it.

It isn't an easy job, but it's a necessary one, and yes, we as players require that Staff are the arbiters of change, just as Staff requires that they are the arbiters of change from players. It's a mutually agreed position.