The Allanak Problem

[Gentleboy]

Both.

[Delirium]

On one hand, aides shouldn't need to be babysat. On the other hand, they need direction and purpose.

It's a synergy more than an either/or situation when it comes to "whose fault was it" that the aide went bonkers or the noble stored.

Finally, sometimes people's playstyles just don't click.

I like less blame and more enabling players to have the tools in their toolboxes that they need to be successful.

[triste]

Both the previous posts here and a spinoff thread "To PK or not to PK" basically make the same "be the change / we are the problem" argument.

Yes, given this is a roleplaying game in which we all have agency, this is often the argument to make. But I feel like conversation often ends here, as it did above, without depth or elaboration.

One thing I've been told is, "Oh, Triste, you aren't being involved in these awesome plots because you are not smart enough / not able to cooperate etc." That is probably the argument people will make about the dwarf who gets blown up in the spin-off thread. He wasn't "smart enough" and "made a bad choice" and so got blown up. But come on; just about all of us have gotten rich by looting a corpse just like that dwarf was trying to do in that story from williamson.

So let's unpack this notion of "not smart enough," or "not mafioso enough" to get involved in plots:
- "Not smart enough" - the IQ test was one of the first efforts to measure intelligence, and it was horribly culturally biased. One of the first iterations of the test shows a white woman with 1940's hair making four expressions, and asking, "In which picture is the woman happy?" In not all cultures does smiling equate happiness, therefore, foreigners were more likely to have lower IQ. All the IQ test measured was homophily.
- "Not mafioso enough" - People always say Allanaki political roleplay is like mob roleplay. Mafia is a term that can refer to Italian, Russian, and similar crime organizations. Twice I've seen people link videos of ex-mobsters talking to say, "See, this is how to do Armageddon political RP." In this thread someone links a video from some mafia movie. What these Mafia organizations talked about in these videos often involve are harsh loyalty tests, a notion of family [which may or may not be racist], and a strong order based on homophily.

We can be the change, but I am not going to be an advocate for homophily. What was great about Williamson's post was a Templar gave a half-elf a chance to live and holy shit look at what happened when a half-elf was given a chance to prove himself. Give people chances and don't glorify assholishness or cliquishness all the time in all circumstances.

[Bast]

I am chiming in here..I have played a lot of Aides...most of them very long lived. I have also played nobles. When you are an aide your job is literally to make the Highborns life easier. Not drag them into drama with you, not to need constant baby sitting. You are an impoverished nobody and Beyoncé/Robet Downey Jr/(whomever you kids like these days) just hired you to make their life easier. If things go well you will never be hungry again, you will be clothing in the best, and want for nothing. Aides should be able to come up with things to do make their lords and ladies lives easier. Go make friends with Merchants, go meet contacts your Highborn might want to use, think up ways to help the house and your bosses career. Because after all if they do well you do well. No one likes to have to constantly micromanage someone else. Make your own fun. Its the same with Gemmed. You shouldn't require a Templar or a Lord or Lady of the Oash to constantly be giving you a to-do list. If your Highborn wants to throw a party as an Aide you should be able to do absolutely everything to make that happen including set up and break without having to ask how many cups they want and on which table.

Having a crappy Lord that is politically circling the drain can suck...but it can really fun to ride that down ward spiral with them you can learn a lot from watching someone else make mistakes. No not every aide is gonna be devoted to their job but most of them should be. This is a career most commoners would and have literally committed murder to get. Your motivation shouldn't be I want to wear silks, be high handed with other commoners, and get treated like a spoiled pet. If you want to play a spoiled brat, app a Highborn. Also if you want to play a good noble or Templar you should be playing aides so you can learn the rules of engagement. I learned everything I needed to know about the nuances of navigating the shark infested waters of Allanak's politics from playing aides. 

To the Atrium it can be really fun depending on who is teaching and who the students are. Personally I found my time playing a Hostess as one of the most difficult roles I have ever had on Arm. You are jozhal at a party full of rantarri. I think I had a pretty high graduation rate but I diffidently feel some players get sick going through Aide 101 over and over again.

[Delirium]

Agreed with the above poster.

Triste I'm not sure what you were responding to. My suggestion is to create 'what you would know' political documentation. It doesn't have to be super in-depth, just clear, concise and helpful to those new to the roles.

I'm not sure there's even a public help file on how to behave around Nobles and Templars as an average commoner from Allanak.

[tapas]

Unfortunately most of the above isn't helpful if the player on the other end just doesn't care about your fun.

Aides are at best vestigial. At worst they're disposable. They seem fun on paper but I can't think of a worse role in the game.

Oh and the simple fact that the locked room estate/apartment killing is still a fucking thing blows my mind.

[triste]

Triste I'm not sure what you were responding to. My suggestion is to create 'what you would know' political documentation.

Unfortunately most of the above isn't helpful if the player on the other end just doesn't care about your fun.

Tapas gets my point. At no point have people complained, "I don't know how to play this role, give me documentation." At no point. People are complaining about "silos" or people not extending roleplay opportunities. People care about getting stuck in dead end roles, such as a disposable aide who gets thrown out in a back room like a tampax. Tapas, Saiseiki, and a lot of other posters here understand that point.

[tapas]

Yeah getting told you got offed because you were doing it wrong is just piling salt on the wound.

I disagree that there are "intricacies" to aide play. Most political play is socializing, wheeling and maybe a little bit of dealing. A lot of it is fabricating in character reasons to impact other characters. This is the "You wear lace? Don't you know that's for northerners." sort of made up roleplay.

And you know what? I'm actually fine with it. It's usually just improvisation. It's when other players and staff buy into the made up stuff that it gets frustrating.

Once I played with a noble player who used one of these ic fabrications to regularly attack my character. And then they used it to turn another character against me. And then they used it to to eventually kill my player. And then finally I was told by a staff member that I didn't understand social roleplay in Armageddon.

The whole situation was upsetting enough to keep me from ever playing an aide again.

**Edited for less asshole.

[Dar]

Yeah getting told you got offed because you were doing it wrong is just piling salt on the wound.

And in this context it's total bullshit. There are no "intricacies" to aide play. It's 80% sitting on a couch and waying people. The rest is actual bullshit players are pulling out of their ass as they play.

And you know what? I'm actually fine with it. Bullshit here is just improvisation. It's when other players and staff buy into that bullshit that it gets frustrating.

Once I played with a noble player who used the bullshit pull to regularly attack my character. And then they used it to turn another character against me. And then they used it to to eventually kill my player. And then they put it into a report to a dumbass member of staff where I actually got labeled as "bad at social roleplay".

And then I got told I was the one doing it wrong. Fuck off.

The whole situation was putrid enough to keep me from ever playing an aide again.

That's interesting.  Has this been awhile ago? Would you be willing to talk about it more? I think this is a very good scenario to look through to see what could've been done better, who's right, who's wrong kind of thing.

[Lotion]

I think that "The Allanak Problem" is an extension of "The Armageddon Problem" and that it's an inherently cursed problem caused by conflicting promises the game makes to us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uE6-vIi1rQ

[Shabago]

"I hate apartment ganks! There's no RP in that!"

Watches people like raiders, baddies and other sorts that go for the RP or death 'In the open'.

st
mount
flee
e
e
e
e
e
e

Huh.

Guess what? The above happens 50x more than the apartment nonsense.

[tapas]

Yeah getting told you got offed because you were doing it wrong is just piling salt on the wound.

And in this context it's total bullshit. There are no "intricacies" to aide play. It's 80% sitting on a couch and waying people. The rest is actual bullshit players are pulling out of their ass as they play.

And you know what? I'm actually fine with it. Bullshit here is just improvisation. It's when other players and staff buy into that bullshit that it gets frustrating.

Once I played with a noble player who used the bullshit pull to regularly attack my character. And then they used it to turn another character against me. And then they used it to to eventually kill my player. And then they put it into a report to a dumbass member of staff where I actually got labeled as "bad at social roleplay".

And then I got told I was the one doing it wrong. Fuck off.

The whole situation was putrid enough to keep me from ever playing an aide again.

That's interesting.  Has this been awhile ago? Would you be willing to talk about it more? I think this is a very good scenario to look through to see what could've been done better, who's right, who's wrong kind of thing.

Rehashing it is a waste to time and I've given all the parties enough grief for it.

The problem is that there really is nothing to stop a noble player from disliking an aide and generating a pretext to off them.

The frustration stems from nothing having changed in so many years AND the simple fact that backroom murders remain a mainstay.

[tapas]

"I hate apartment ganks! There's no RP in that!"

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Watches people like raiders, baddies and other sorts that go for the RP or death 'In the open'.

st
mount
flee
e
e
e
e
e
e

Huh.

Guess what? The above happens 50x more than the apartment nonsense.

I can't say I see a whole lot of this at all. Even as playing a BigScary, players tend to stick around and converse even if the odds are against them.

[rinthrat]

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Why, though? What's so special about apartment PK vs. anywhere else?

I still don't understand this. If you kill someone 'out in the open', it needs to be instant more often than not. The victim doesn't even get a scene out of it.

[Barsook]

I think that "The Allanak Problem" is an extension of "The Armageddon Problem" and that it's an inherently cursed problem caused by conflicting promises the game makes to us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uE6-vIi1rQ

Agreed. Watch/listen to that video. I think we all can let go of something to improve our amazing game.

[tapas]

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Why, though? What's so special about apartment PK vs. anywhere else?

I still don't understand this. If you kill someone 'out in the open', it needs to be instant more often than not. The victim doesn't even get a scene out of it.

The bottom line is that I don't want a scene from you if you're playing the game this way.

And yeah. I can tolerate backstabs and magick and desert skirmishes. None of those are sure things, all of them employ some level of risk. But locked rooms are used by players to make the promise of RP and abuse that promise to get an easy win out of it.

**Edited to be less of an asshole.

[Shabago]

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Why, though? What's so special about apartment PK vs. anywhere else?

I still don't understand this. If you kill someone 'out in the open', it needs to be instant more often than not. The victim doesn't even get a scene out of it.

Dude. If you're pulling the backroom bullshit, then I've already written you off. I don't want your shitty scene.

And yeah. I can tolerate backstabs and magick and desert skirmishes. But locked rooms are gamey nonsense for players that need to win.

Gave you two tries to actually behave your age, Tapas. Knock it off, discuss things rationally and civilly or don't post. Period and simple, isn't it?

[triste]

I think that "The Allanak Problem" is an extension of "The Armageddon Problem" and that it's an inherently cursed problem caused by conflicting promises the game makes to us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uE6-vIi1rQ

Thank you for sharing this, definitely a useful framework and extremely relevant to this topic. I went to GDC a while back, I wish a lot of the technology demoed there would go mainstream.

Per the framework laid out by this speaker, there are a lot of conflicting promises in Armageddon. I think aides often pop up as a hot button issue because it is a role loaded with promises: if you play an aide, you will be involved in behind the scenes dealings and politics; if you play an aide, you will get exposure and experience with Allanaki politics that will allow you to play a noble or a templar later. The only thing you have to chip in to achieve all of this is your best role playing efforts and following the docs.

The core of these promises is that Armageddon is a harsh world in which the career trajectory of your individual character is limited, but that long term you can experience a variety of roles when you demonstrate the experience and merit needed to get those roles. Even if you play an aide and get killed in a back room, you should have gotten enough involvement and experience to have fun, and also win the meta-achievement of some karma or the like assuming you role played a setting fitting character.

When this promise of lasting achievement and plot involvement gets broken, that is when people start complaining.

I try to reserve my complaints to clear cut cases. Here is a clear cut way in which the promise of Armageddon is broken: if you cannot play more than 10 hours a week, you are not allowed to have leadership roles. Period. It's not in the official documentation anywhere, but on multiple occasions staff have confirmed that this policy is more or less in place. Because this requirement is not listed anywhere along with all of the game's promises of great roleplay, it is tantamount to a broken promise.

Per the framework of that talk, Armageddon tries to handle the tension around this promise with gatekeeping, carrots, and sometimes 'smores (making lemonade out of lemons). As long as you are going to have feels-bad-man gatekeeping place like "You must play at least 10 hours a week to be a leader," effectively locking some players who are motivated by achievement in hell, then you need more 'smores style solutions (again to borrow the term from this talk). I think that is why I love outside the box thinking by people like Codemaster advocating for more love and care shown to criminal roleplay. The game needs to be playable, and if the game makes promises it outright breaks, at least make the experience fun for those who can never break past the gatekeeping.

That presentation ends with one of the key challenges being PvP games where people want to win 70% of the time but inherently cannot by definition. Armageddon suffers from that. It also ends with the example of social games that balance achievements with open world style creativity. Armageddon suffers from that problem, too, because it is a rich, multifaceted game that has been running for three decades. Armageddon makes a lot of promises around harsh PvP mixed with the opportunity to create lasting in game change, and destruction and creation are inherently at odds. This talk given by this guy at GDC emphasizes that balancing games requires sacrifice, but cutting content isn't necessarily the answer. Personally, I think we need to rexamine our heavy gatekeeping and karma based carrot approach and look a little more at the making lemonade out of lemons approach. After all, the point of Armageddon is it being apocalyptic and hellacious, so make it fun to play as someone on the lower rungs because those characters are just as valid and just as in setting as the high borns. It really is simple. If we accept that some people are locked out of the current "promise of the game," let's make lemonade out of lemons, so bitter fucks like us can be sweet for once.

[tapas]

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Why, though? What's so special about apartment PK vs. anywhere else?

I still don't understand this. If you kill someone 'out in the open', it needs to be instant more often than not. The victim doesn't even get a scene out of it.

Dude. If you're pulling the backroom bullshit, then I've already written you off. I don't want your shitty scene.

And yeah. I can tolerate backstabs and magick and desert skirmishes. But locked rooms are gamey nonsense for players that need to win.

Gave you two tries to actually behave your age, Tapas. Knock it off, discuss things rationally and civilly or don't post. Period and simple, isn't it?

I've edited my replies to be less aggressive and accusatory. Sorry for that.

[Armaddict]

The bottom line is that I don't want a scene from you if you're playing the game this way.

From this statement itself, I'd say there's an entirely different bottom line.

[rinthrat]

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Why, though? What's so special about apartment PK vs. anywhere else?

I still don't understand this. If you kill someone 'out in the open', it needs to be instant more often than not. The victim doesn't even get a scene out of it.

The bottom line is that I don't want a scene from you if you're playing the game this way.

And yeah. I can tolerate backstabs and magick and desert skirmishes. None of those are sure things, all of them employ some level of risk. But locked rooms are used by players to make the promise of RP and abuse that promise to get an easy win out of it.

**Edited to be less of an asshole.

That's still not something I can understand, or relate to.

When I came back from the game after a loooooong break, I had a character that eventually got the sense that people in Allanak wanted him dead for some reason. None of that made any sense to me or the PC at the time, but he fled to Red Storm.

He managed to stay alive there for a while and got lulled into a false sense of security. Eventually, some people there got him drunk, lured him into a clan compound there, and subsequently killed him with greetings from <that faction in Allanak that wanted him dead>. That was an 8/10 death for me - points redacted only because the PCs that wanted me dead in Allanak did that for shitty reasons (basically: 'I was playing a serial killer and you did some minor thing to piss me off that I don't even remember'), and I didn't find out the entire story until years later.

The PCs who did the killing, though? They had nothing to do with that, and gave me the best ending they possibly could in that situation. I vastly prefer this over a backstab or an arrow out of nowhere, with no explanation or without even knowing who killed my PC.

So please, as far as I'm concerned? Lure me into a locked room anytime, it's much better than seeing a random mantishead out of nowhere. I really, really don't understand where the hate for that sort of kill is coming from, or why I shouldn't be doing it. 

[tapas]

The bottom line is that I don't want a scene from you if you're playing the game this way.

From this statement itself, I'd say there's an entirely different bottom line.

Sentences that make sense, 2020.

[triste]

I hate apartment ganks because I feel cheated out my character. Not because "There's no RP."

Why, though? What's so special about apartment PK vs. anywhere else?

I still don't understand this. If you kill someone 'out in the open', it needs to be instant more often than not. The victim doesn't even get a scene out of it.

The bottom line is that I don't want a scene from you if you're playing the game this way.

And yeah. I can tolerate backstabs and magick and desert skirmishes. None of those are sure things, all of them employ some level of risk. But locked rooms are used by players to make the promise of RP and abuse that promise to get an easy win out of it.

**Edited to be less of an asshole.

That's still not something I can understand, or relate to.

When I came back from the game after a loooooong break, I had a character that eventually got the sense that people in Allanak wanted him dead for some reason. None of that made any sense to me or the PC at the time, but he fled to Red Storm.

He managed to stay alive there for a while and got lulled into a false sense of security. Eventually, some people there got him drunk, lured him into a clan compound there, and subsequently killed him with greetings from <that faction in Allanak that wanted him dead>. That was an 8/10 death for me - points redacted only because the PCs that wanted me dead in Allanak did that for shitty reasons (basically: 'I was playing a serial killer and you did some minor thing to piss me off that I don't even remember'), and I didn't find out the entire story until years later.

The PCs who did the killing, though? They had nothing to do with that, and gave me the best ending they possibly could in that situation. I vastly prefer this over a backstab or an arrow out of nowhere, with no explanation or without even knowing who killed my PC.

So please, as far as I'm concerned? Lure me into a locked room anytime, it's much better than seeing a random mantishead out of nowhere. I really, really don't understand where the hate for that sort of kill is coming from, or why I shouldn't be doing it.

This is what I've seen happen when Templars fond of killing people in locked rooms have a heyday. And note, there are a few mechanisms for this, such as coordinating with a leader of a clan to get someone clan dumped within their compound, thus making this more surprising and inescapable than a locked apartment -- anyway -- this is what happens when you condone locked apartment kills, clan dump kills, whiran gust into the arena kills, etc: people stop roleplaying with each other. I've seen it with my own eyes. In game, criminal PCs, or northerner PCs, will twitch and run at the mere sight of a Templar! Here we come, our big dramatic encounter where the rebel has been entrapped:

A templar fond of locked rooms rides in from the east.
8 goons and a half-giant goon ride in from the east.
A rebel PC who would love to roleplay but doesn't want inescapable death runs to the west!


Literally in the same tick, because the rebel was scanning and saw the Templar coming. No one has any trust for each other, because that templar might have literally killed three of that rebel's PC's in a row. Literally. When I first saw someone run from a Templar without roleplay like that I considered submitting a player complaint against them, but after I saw how many people the Templars were killing and how they were killing them I understood. And so no one gets to enjoy roleplay at all at the outset of this encounter. Tapas said this himself with the whole notion of "I trusted you to give me roleplay, but you didn't."

Also Armaddict, I would caution against assuming people's intent and re-reading people's very own statement's of their intent please, it can be considered rude.

[triste]

TLDR: There is a golden rule of respect. If you give more respect, you get more respect. It works the same for roleplay and it works both ways for both parties.

• If, as a subordinate, you are a dramatic little twit, you will get in turn what you've put out: an end to your plots, because you aren't cooperating with more important, game fitting plots.

• If, as a leader, you are killing people in their second meeting with you, people are less likely to want to roleplay with you after the second encounter you killed them during.

• If, as a subordinate, you are helping your leader, collaborating to generate awesome roleplay for everyone, and involving people, you will likely see your plots manifest as lasting change in the game.

• If, as a leader, you see a criminal as a tool to advance your schemes as is the case in Williamson's great to PK or not to PK post, then you are going to see kudos and more roleplay come your way.

It's simple. But we need to have compassion for people who cannot, due to whatever circumstances, fit into one of the good niches (bullet 3 or 4). For example, some people are literally never allowed to try bullet 4 because of arbitrary playtime requirements. Some people also just do not want to play bullet 3 because they aren't, shall we say, submissive. You need to accommodate people locked out of experiencing the good in the game or they will just quit.

[HeeBeeGB]

This is a fairly confusing assertion, as there should be a separation between the PC and the Player. A PC can be insubordinate, not get their job done well, be a drama queen, nefarious, a liar. That doesn't mean the player is.

The inference I get from some of these posts is 'I should only be PK'd or Killed in the fashion I find desirable', and that cannot and should not be the case 100% of the time. Or even 50% of the time.

As was pointed out by Lizzie and others, the end of someone's story can be the perpetuation of another's story. I've been super pissed about times my PCs have been PK'd. I've never filed a player complaint over it, because I keep IC, well, IC. I've been killed a dozen or so times, and though I almost never found the circumstances agreeable for me or my PC, I never thought there was something fishy about the motivations of fellow players.

Also, Templars are not the perpetuators of Apartment PKs. They literally have jail cells. If we're going down the road of 'Templars are being too authoritarian/rude in killing people', I dunno what game we're all playing together.