Clan bonuses via code?

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

No, I don't need to post a good scenario, Triste. You're not following the idea's evolution, nor are you treating the idea properly considering what's actually been proposed. Instead you're making up scenarios which literally can not or will not happen.

So since you're hell-bent on being as difficult as you can be, ignoring reality, and engaging in extreme exaggeration of imagined flaws in the plan, I don't really think that spending even more time explaining the bones of the idea and giving it flesh and muscle are going to matter.

You can either engage in conversation with dignity and class, or I can ignore you. I assure you, we can and will continue to have this conversation whether you're part of it or not.

[triste]

It's called anticipating edge cases, and coders often have a sense of humor when they do this.

Either way, I respect Staff members' posted positions up to this point. The game isn't supposed to be fair, but certain mechanisms are obviously ripe for abuse or less than ideal coded outcomes. I think this is why even though I am "difficult" for you, Staff members' positions, so far, have aligned more with mine. Staff aren't interested in adding crappy mechanisms. But I'll let you all continue.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I don't have a problem with edge cases - they can happen and should be anticipated. I respect your ability to conceive them, but they should be relevant to the code you're working on. And they should exist within the framework of what's being presented.

I don't find your edge casing difficult. I don't even find your disapproval difficult. I welcome discussion about solving an idea's problems or even dismissing the idea before the work goes into it, because it's smart.

What I find difficult is that you're not really discussing this idea at this point. You're discussing another idea that, as far as I can tell, really only exists in your world. And your social graces are extremely difficult to deal with.

But, if we're going to agree to engage in civil discourse, let's examine your scenarios.

The Story of the Man with the Biggest Balls in the Known
- Magick can't dispel the mundane. It can't dispel poison, currently, so you have to assume that the code could be written to tell the difference between x, y, and z.

Banned for Stat Crimes
- Staff isn't going to ban you for buggy code that you can't even see.

House Krappius
- Nobody is going to spend half a year in Kadius and suddenly leave because they obtained a bonus to fellatio. Everyone wants a boost to fellatio (j/k).
  But no, seriously, nobody is going to spend half a year in Kadius and leave because their small bonus wasn't what they were hoping for. Also, Merchant Houses have Clan Crafts that already represent their specialty. I wouldn't give them skill boosts.

Min-Max Badass
- Nobody who's spent enough time to obtain all of those bonuses is going to twink-kill the Sarge. If you spend that much time on a character, you have more respect for your story than that.

[triste]

House Krappius
- Nobody is going to spend half a year in Kadius and suddenly leave because they obtained a bonus to fellatio. Everyone wants a boost to fellatio (j/k).
  But no, seriously, nobody is going to spend half a year in Kadius and leave because their small bonus wasn't what they were hoping for. Also, Merchant Houses have Clan Crafts that already represent their specialty. I wouldn't give them skill boosts.

Min-Max Badass
- Nobody who's spent enough time to obtain all of those bonuses is going to twink-kill the Sarge. If you spend that much time on a character, you have more respect for your story than that.

Uhg, since you directly replied to me, hopefully I can reply without someone complaining that I am posting.

It's just glass half-empty, glass half-full. You see the glass half-full in your retorts here. I think experience with administering a system like a MUD or any other coded project jaundices one's eye well enough to know that there are plenty of people who play games and use mechanisms in an exploitative way. It's human nature. You then have to decide when to draw the line each time, contact people, get explanations and pleas, and it's just so tedious.

If you want a character with some long term, special potential, there are skill bump apps and a lot of mechanisms available. The ones you are proposing are so imbalancing.

[triste]

On a positive note: Dar and Delirium's ideas have some tractability, because you *gasp* simply earn the bonus, and have fun RP while you do it. Riev's item idea is also tolerable for the same reason, but suffers from possible exploits to about the same degree as 7DV/Aruven/Armaddict's idea.

[Dar]

Only one small item of note talking about elite versus not-elite.

Knights/knight cavalry versus peasant infantry in medieval Europe.  Knights are going to be able to slaughter the infantry far more often than the other way around, this is due to specialised training.  This would be your Tor Scorpions.

Welsh longbows versus the French at Agincourt.  Those longbowmen (and the English longbows as well) required a lot of training - yes, this was 'indy', but it was dedicated, and one-on-one, they'd get slaughtered by a knight.  Numbers is what counts with longbows to create good volleys.  This would be your Bynners.

Byn has the numbers and consistant, constant training from people who are self-taught (down through the years).  Tor has much fewer numbers, but access to better trainers, better food, better medics...but specifically those highly sought after, top-of-the-line trainers that money can afford, giving one-to-one training on certain aspects (which I doubt the NPC Bynners give/get!).

Another example other than martial arts...one a bit more relevant to the skill trees we've got here?

While it's true that Knights dedicated their whole lives to combat training. Because their profit, well being, and promotion depended on it. While most non-elite forces were peasants that were pulled away from their fields, given a spear (Not a sword, swords are expensive), and made to fight. So yes. A knight would eviscerate a peasant.

But ... knights were counted in hundreds at best, peasants were counted in thousands. What kept the knights from being swarmed? Their combat training? No. No way in hell.

What kept the knights from being swarmed was armor, lances, and most importantly ... a horse. An armored horse at that. In Combat, knights did not fight one on one. They were a strike cavalry force, where they'd charge through the people and then ride away.

The weapons that the peasants had often could not damage the armor. Which is why people began to use maces. Partly because the maces would pierce the armor better, but also because it would bend the armor and stun the person inside it. Mostly, if a knight got pulled off his horse and surrounded by 10 peasants, that knight is cooked.  But if a charge ran through the ranks and came out on the other side, very often the total loss of life for the knights was zero.

Why did Knights have heavier, longer swords? Definitely not due to training, or their immense strength. They were normal human beings. Nor is it because those swords were better at killing peasants. If a knight is fighting peasants on foot, he already lost. And those swords were very bad for using while mounted. Sables are best for that as later age cavalry shown.

Knights had longer heavier swords for fights against other knights. Which has happened from time to time when one knight cavalry caught up with another knight cavalry. Due to low numbers of knights in general, such fights often ended up in one on one/two on one mismashes. That's where reach, armor piercing, and the sheer force of the blow (multiplied by weight) had the greater impact.  Leave the concepts of Great Cleave that kills 3 people at once at the door please.


In short. While training of course had a big impact. That training wasnt supernaturally different somehow. It was just a matter of dedicating your life to military training, instead of plowing fields. A big matter that made knights stand out was his gear. His chain and plate armor, his long spear, and most importantly ... the horse.

That's also why crossbows were loathed and were considered dishonorable. Because once crossbows came about with enough power, the bolts would pierce the armor.

Mercenaries who tended to have a bit better gear and training would've been affective against knights. But if they were dismounted, there was always this matter of the cavalry just rushing past you, taking it's toll in death, and then racing on before you can slow its charge.


Unfortunately, none of this is significantly relevant in Arm's combat mechanics. As gear loses out significantly to skill training and stats. And 2 lifesworn Tor who spent their last 5 years training with each other (At least when their irl schedules synced) and are decked out in their best Tor gear will get themselves massacred by 2 Bynners with shit gear, but who had a dozen other bynners available all around to provide a steady combat skillz training.

I always always always grimaced when I saw Bynners try to goad Tor/Wyverns into actual combat. Be it spar, or an arena challenge. Because Bynners would either win, or they were so extremely outmatched 1 game year on byn vs 8 game years on wyvern. Or something similar.


This thread is moot. Staff have specifically said that NO, they are not interested in this avenue of development. And that's it. There are other things that will improve this game that they will be working on.   And that's fine. It'll be my last post regarding this topic. But I'd just like to express that 'yes', if properly done, this will improve the gameplay and improve roleplaying instead of detracting it.







If properly done.

[Armaddict]

Soooo....
1) Staff position was already made early on in the thread.
2) Early on I also acknowledged it and said that most GDB ideas don't make it through regardless of support, and a lot of ideas that are much more contested are implemented.  Most of the time, some sort of discussion continues anyway.

People either view the GDB as a place to get things done, or a place to talk about the cool shit that is Armageddon.  People with the former view tend to evolve into the latter as they realize point 2 above, or they stop participating as much.  You can be whichever you please, triste, but the thing that keeps making me eyeroll is when you keep on essentially pointing out bugs or abusive behavior (unlikely as it seems to me) or strange outliers instead of the concept itself in genuine terms.  You keep making the constant inference that there's just this everpresent non-roleplaying faction that you're singlehandedly combatting.  In your consistent PM's, you say things like 'The real reason I hate this idea is that I'll never get to use it', then go down a constantly devolving path of 'THIS ISN'T RP, YOU'RE COSTING US PLAYERS, I'M DONE WITH THIS DISCUSSION'.

I asked for clarification from someone to see what page they were on, which page I was on, and where we differed in order to find the things that needed ironing out for the 'This would be cool' discussion to continue, and I'm not certain about what exactly in that drew you back in with more weird scenarios where you even bring -staff- behavior in...IF THIS HAPPENS YOU COULD BE THE VICTIM OF A BAN BECAUSE OF THIS IDEA, VOTE NO NOW! 

Let's imagine we get the world Armaddict wants, a world in which we have sweet boosts with a list of rules and exceptions 10 pages long that defenders of skill boosts have thought of to justify their position.

It isn't a list of rules and exceptions unless you think of it that way.  What we've talked about is small, but relevant boosts that do something small in the short term (i.e. Dude hasn't gotten much training for the myriad of IC and OOC reasons that this happens), in that small bump, and something notable in the long run (i.e. Dude gets high level at the skill and becomes actually -better- at it by some margin than most can achieve)...and we've talked about the various ways of implementing that (i.e. Items, flat bonuses, no bonuses, and mansa has called for other ideas non-related to this one), and made changes based off of concerns or preferences.  Those concerns...are the bug cases, the abuse cases, that you bring up, as unlikely as they seem.  That's helping coding, and is setting the framework for how things behave.  It's strange that you talk about coding, but talk about bugs in scenarios that say 'Don't implement this idea, I hate it!' instead of what would be more coder-like, which is 'How do I implement it in a way that minimizes these sorts of bugs?'  I am a coder, and I just have very very little exposure to people who talk about it in that way.

We are not some sort of anti-RP cabal trying to slip one past staff by talking about an idea we're intrigued by and trying to make it morph and fit into a usable, utilitarian delivery.  Jesus, just some of the names involved in it should you kind of aware of that. You keep dumping that plate on some pretty fantastic roleplayers.

[slipshod]

I agree with the above from Armaddict and 7DV.

This is not the first thread that has gone from "Discussion of Topic X" to "Discussion of Triste's Opinions on Topic X".  It's a tiring trend for me.

Triste enticed/threatened us with backing off and leaving this discussion when I "insulted" around the second or third page, then promptly increased the post frequency with some back to back posts mixed in for good measure.  Triste might find some value in sitting back and watching a conversation develop amongst others for a whole page (or even half a page) within a thread.  It is as though Triste worries we'll get two steps down the path of brainstorming without keeping their very personal and unique objections at the forefront of our minds.  Even if some other people agree with those concerns, that constituency doesn't require constant obstructionist representation in the thread.  Many of them even speak for themselves.  Even if 99% of the GDB polled disliked the idea it doesn't represent the total number of people who play the game.  Even if some staff do chime in, I daresay they're not speaking for all staff, for all time, for all possible permutations of the ideas on the table.  The OP and Armaddict already had some of this conversation in that 2015 thread, and it might come up again someday.  I'd also like to see/hear staff's feedback on a larger variety of posts within threads, rather than the bullet points Triste has continued to hammer for or against in post after post to dominate the direction of the conversation leading up to a staff person's joining in.

Triste speaks about "winning" and "losing" as if this is an adversarial process where staff will lock the thread at the end, score it like a boxing match, and either implement or forever prohibit the idea based on the outcome.  This is not that kind of a debate.  This is a petri dish for growing ideas.

I can find value in these conversations even if we don't see our ideas implemented exactly as we describe them here.  Frankly, I've been a little uneasy recently when I've seen some changes go into the game based purely on GDB activity.  It's important (to some) to remember that there are players who read these boards and never post, and players who don't read these boards other than Staff Announcements.  In the 24 years I've played this game I've had relatively little to do with the GDB.  I was happy with in-game rumor boards and a website for big announcements and password protected clan docs.

Triste, I don't want to address any more of my part in this conversation to you.  I don't want to reread my ideas before I post to try to defend against bad faith deliberate misinterpretations.  I don't want to be subjected to passive aggressive pejoratives and wild argumenta ad misericordiam. I just want to brainstorm with my friends and fellow Armers here.  You're not really adding anything new to conversation other than reminding us repeatedly that you don't like the premise.  You speak about attempts to empathize and concerns about driving people to disengage from or quit the game; no need for hypotheticals, you are driving me to disengage from posting and in some cases even reading GDB threads.  Food for thought.  Or not.

I'm a hopeless optimist, so I'll take one last stab at joining the conversation, maybe talking around some unhelpful posts.  Otherwise I guess I'm on the verge of "losing" and will just give up (and when I announce I'm done with a conversation, you can watch what happens to my post count in the thread).

---

Earlier Mansa proposed a framework to build some brainstorming upon, using ranks within the Byn.  I appreciate the effort to get the conversation moving and the creative juices flowing into a jell-o mold.  I think my problem was using the Byn as the example clan, as they are more of a jack-of-all trade/master-of-none clan that wouldn't have a single specialty.  Or to put it another way, their "specialties" are already-baked in and backed up by existing code in my opinion.

This thread had attracted a number of former Tor players, perhaps because we've experienced this disconnect most acutely.   Big HRPTs where Art of War style strategizing and collaborating with staff to shape the future of the world are few and far between.  I can count them on one hand and I've already aged myself in this post.  So we Tor players have had to manifest our expertise in strategy and tactics within the limits of the game's combat code.  The documentation states that the Tor clan is top shelf for all things military, yet in code terms their leader PCs are by most straightforward measures inferior to Templar PCs.  Their guard/soldier PCs are at best the coded equals of mercenaries and spar-happy AoD privates, and in reality are usually weaker for lack of sparring partners.  This might sound like stating the obvious, but when playing in and representing a clan with a specialty, it all hinges on the other outside players going along with the clan's documented reputation.  When I played a Tor Lord,  I would say 33% of the Templar PCs he encountered treated him like an expert in military strategy.  RP sessions with a Templar PC who was backing up that reputation with their RP made Tor "real" for all the PCs in that session.  If combat broke out and the Tors were all mortally wounded while the Whatsit guards stood proud, that could be immersion breaking.  And if the other 66% of the Templar PCs reverted more often than not to treating Tors based on their coded abilities, immersion was further harmed.   But in a way, who could blame them?  Unless it was a pre-planned HRPT with staff support, I as a Templar player wouldn't want to assign a Tor lord with what I know are 3 newbie scorpions and one special app Silver to guard a pass when I have a Byn, or AoD, or even a group of some buff indy hunters along as conscripts.

If I can attempt to reframe us (even though I think the OP has given up on his thread), would it be helpful to identify those clans or other categories of PCs we think do not get treatment consummate with their fact-based reputations in the game world?  Some clans have a reputation that is reinforced by code already.  Kurac can refine spices better than other clans.  Salarr can make higher quality weapons.  Kadius can produce finer silks.  The merchant houses have specialties and monopolies, but none leap out at me as lacking reinforcement.  Templars need to be feared, and I think they are.  Elves get more stamina.  Half-giants get more HP.  So which groups are lacking and what could help?  I admit some of my ideas might seem mmorpg-ish, but I'm imagining this as a game that evolves and can become more complex where that serves immersion.  I also like the idea of a "senior" PC being able to convey the bonuses on the clannies in the room for a set duration, maybe with a minimum number of clannies required to kick in.  Dispute or remind me if you think something on my list is backed up in game already.  Add what I've forgotten.  Or none of the above.

House Tor - Reputation for masters of military strategy and tactics, akin to ancient Sparta amongst the Greek city states.  Currently on par with any other group of PCs in terms of combat code.
   I could imagine Scorpion PCs in the room getting a bonus to flee in the same direction when a Tor-trained commander issues a Retreat Command to his unit. 
   I could imagine Scorpion PCs in the room getting a boost to shield use when the commander issues Shield Wall Command. 
   I could also imagine many of the things others have suggested in this thread.

House Oash - Monopoly on ocotillo wines is currently enforced by code.  Oash has a reputation for employing gemmed mages, and AFAIK being the only ones who do so other than the Templarate.  Do they also have a reputation for being extra good at all things magick-y?   Could that benefit from coded reinforcement? 
   I could imagine a boost to Oash PC mages' mana regen when their senior mage in the room issues the Group Meditate Command.

Atrium - (I saw something about this in another thread) Reputation for training the best aides.  Currently most aide work seems to be RP based and someone can start RPing a master aide without having attended the Atrium with their PC.
   I could imagine an Atrium student completing enough training to get a boost to the number of items they could hold in their inventory (or just +agility if that's easier).  Serve the 12-top.
   I could imagine an Atrium student gaining a Poison Detection ability if they've gone through food taster training.

Certain D-Elf or Outrider clans - a stamina or stamina regen boost for having a leader Run the Pack or Herd the Mounts.  Though I'm not sure these clans need reinforcement or have such reputations.


Bed time.  Hoping sense was made.

[Kyviantre]

Atrium - a boost to cooking might be good?  I know the last time I played an Aide, being able to cook was considered a 'needful thing' by the Noble bosses.

[triste]

I haven't posted in 4 posts, 20 paragraphs or so, and a whopping 5000+ words or so.

Yet I check here and see slipshod insulting me over several sentences, spending more time disparaging me and my ideas more than I have spent time individually disparaging anyone.

Golden rule. Stop acting like monsters. I kept backing off because of disgusting harassment like what you posted, and now you post more disgusting harassment when I finally back off? Sounds like the tactics of a fourth grade bully. Not smart or sophisticated or kind.

Reminder that Staff's position is more in line with mine than these recent posts. People like slipshod can try to shut up people with this position by slinging insults... But what a barbaric and small minded tactic.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I kinda like the "Special Maneuvers" type of enhancement slipshod suggests. While there's a ton of good ideas throughout the thread about defining a House's teaching, this idea takes the leaders of these clans and gives them actual features, not just boosted skills.

The Red Scorpion's POV
>The steely-eyed man issues an order to those who will heed it.
You remember the steely-eyed man's training: Tactical Retreat.
You remember how to follow your leader in retreat and avoid opportunity attacks.

>The steely-eyed man tactically retreats south.
The straight-backed NPC guard follows the steely-eyed man and retreats south.
You follow the steely eyed man and retreat south.

The Silver Scorpion's POV
>issue Tactical Retreat
>You impart House Tor training: Tactical Retreat.

>flee south

>You tactically retreat south.
The straight-backed NPC guard follows you and retreats south.
The hulking, bronzed woman follows you and retreats south.

*Of course, I've got to note here - this is probably a lot more codework than raised caps or skill boosts. But it's really, really cool, and I like it a ton.

[Barsook]

I dig this idea for the same reason as 7DV. Here's a possible problem: we are asking for the staff to open up the elite forces of each open clan that has one. Or at least a few of them. I'm pretty sure the staff only wants one to be opened based on the "A small peek behind the curtain" thread and I feel like it's going to be open for storytelling reasons rather than from us asking for one to be open. Which I'm happy for.

ETA: That elite force could just be the Sun Legions not like the Oashi Elite.

[triste]

I like scenes where roleplay is first:

A Sergeant screams: We're losing, we have to retreat!
Amos flees to the south.
A Sergeant screams: Breedy, Talia, hurry up!
Talia flees to the south.
A Sergeant flee to the south.
To the north you see: Breedy the Badass fights until he dies.
A Sergeant says: Well, Breedy did say he had a score to settle. I can't deny him that.


Not Final Fantasy Tactics style skills or whatever videogame / non-real-life thing this idea came from:

A Sergeant screams: We're losing, we have to retreat!
Amos flees to the south.
A Sergeant screams: No, flee tactically!
Amos yells from the south: I did! I'm alive and it looks like you guys are dying!
A Sergeant screams: I MEANT USE THE COMMAND YOU IDIOT
A Sergeant tries to tactically flee south, but flees north over the shield wall!
The entire unit but Amos runs over the shieldwall!
Breedy screams, as they fly off the Shieldwall: I told you I had a score to settle Sarge now I will never get my reveeeeeengeeee....
Amos thinks, wow, I am sure glad I still play this game like it's a realistic RPI it used to be rather than relying on tacky, videogamey skills!

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I dig this idea for the same reason as 7DV. Here's a possible problem: we are asking for the staff to open up the elite forces of each open clan that has one. Or at least a few of them. I'm pretty sure the staff only wants one to be opened based on the "A small peek behind the curtain" thread and I feel like it's going to be open for storytelling reasons rather than from us asking for one to be open. Which I'm happy for.

ETA: That elite force could just be the Sun Legions not like the Oashi Elite.

Yeah, true. This idea certainly would have been more prevalent back when you had all of the Northern/Southern clans open.

[Shabago]

I suppose sitting out much longer isn't required at this stage of a pending lock.

Staff have zero issue with a topic being discussed. Go nuts. Will it be implemented? Likely not. Will that change some time, somewhere down the road? Who knows. This game has constantly changed, so what's the point in saying never?

Meanwhile,

Triste. Knock it off. Stop the bad faith points, don't get on a soap box to preach at your fellow players because you happen to have a similar stance as staff. Do not call people monsters for pointing out your bad faith arguments. Take a breath - let people talk.

Slip/Addict/whoever else: If a post is bothersome, bad faith, etc - skip it. Carry on. It doesn't require direct confrontation or we end up with thread locks on good discussion, which is what is about to happen here. If it's a direct insult, inflammatory, baiting, etc. - hit the report button. I have no issue in handing out bans until the rules are followed.

[triste]

Alright, if we're humoring this idea, I want people to be able to allocate any rank rewarded points flexibly. House Tor might have people specialized in scouting, or calvalry/riding, or dueling and bodyguarding. People should be able to realize their character concepts rather than having them stifled by a flat boost. Roleplay first, always, this isn't a soapbox, it's what the game is about!

Last post for real, now that Shabago has made another statement on this. And thanks again for your stated position for the direction of the game at the moment, I know others agree.

[Barsook]

Specialization would work if there is a story-related reason; in which based on the current IC events, there is a reason, but again, I think the staff is opening just one of those groups. What will they specialize in? Let's just wait for that.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

... we are asking for the staff to open up the elite forces of each open clan that has one ...

I'll make a little note here, too. We have a smaller playerbase than we did a few years ago, but we've also developed a completely different relationship between staff/players than we had back in the day. I like to think we're in a position to grow if we just figure out the formula. And if we could grow again, it would allow a ton of things to reopen.

But in the meantime, what we could do is rotate which clans are open as players ebb and flow from clan to clan. Maybe it could hinge on the lifespan of the leadership of that clan. And if we did that, offering limited time access to this clan or that, then regardless of the fact that Lyskae or Tor isn't currently open, these concepts of how their clan presents their teachings would have cyclical value, when those clans were opened for play.

I love a lot of the ideas that have been proposed throughout this thread. Just a ton of creativity and innovation. I've got to head to work soon, but I hope I can start a little list of various clans, with conceptualized implementations of these ideas, when I get back.

I don't know exactly what you preceive as flexible, Triste, but if it lay within the skills that were part of the House's specializations, that's not a bad idea.

[Barsook]

... we are asking for the staff to open up the elite forces of each open clan that has one ...

I'll make a little note here, too. We have a smaller playerbase than we did a few years ago, but we've also developed a completely different relationship between staff/players than we had back in the day. I like to think we're in a position to grow if we just figure out the formula. And if we could grow again, it would allow a ton of things to reopen.

I forgot that we are smaller now.

But in the meantime, what we could do is rotate which clans are open as players ebb and flow from clan to clan. Maybe it could hinge on the lifespan of the leadership of that clan. And if we did that, offering limited time access to this clan or that, then regardless of the fact that Lyskae or Tor isn't currently open, these concepts of how their clan presents their teachings would have cyclical value, when those clans were opened for play.

Rotation is might what be the best solution for at least the elite forces of the clans. It would allow that specialization and exploration of said specializations. It will also allow us to explore more of the Nine histories and create new ones.

[slipshod]

I like the idea of rotated clan openings as well to keep specialized clans seeming special, at least unless and until we have a playerbase to support them all being open at once.

I also think a thread like this can be useful as a kind of public service announcement to the community, where we remind one another of some of the documented foundations of the gameworld that can sometimes get eclipsed by the coded realities.

Just like we remind players that magickers are generally treated with suspicion/fear/distrust, it can be helpful to just have a conversation like this remind players of the specialties of certain niche clans.  If your PC encounters a Tor Academy instructor or an Atrium teacher, you can be reminded to RP with them as if they are a master of their arena.  And if their RP doesn't reflect their clan's documented mastery/specialty, it could be that their PC is a misfit/outcast/neophyte in their clan and can be judged as a unique individual rather than a representative sampling of their organization. 

It's helpful to me to hear from people who have played in other groups that felt a disconnect between how the group is described in documentation and how the group is treated (usually because of coded realities) in game.  I think the Atrium is an interesting case study because its issues have so little to do with combat.

I am looking forward to 7DV's list of clans and suggested reputation boosters.

[Narf]

Ignoring other context, I'm going to say I'm against the implementation of small cap increases to skills, though I'm in favor of the overarching goals of making clans distinctive with coded benefits.

For my reasoning consider two scenarios:

Scenario A: Staff implements the idea as stated and gives a small bonus to the cap of skills for training within a given clan.
Scenario B: Staff gets lazy and just claims that they increased the cap for certain clans without actually doing it.

My issue is that there is no plausible way for a player to tell the difference between the real improvement and the placebo improvement. This has been well established with long term players making claims that they're "absolutely sure" some coded aspect is in the game after years of testing, when in fact it wasn't. A small increase to the cap of a skill is almost impossible to discern for a number of reasons. One is that most players will never cap a lot of their skills anyways. This is doubly true in combat clans with poor access to training options. A second is that the mathematical difference between a 80 and an 85 is very small for our purposes, much smaller than a difference between a 20 and a 25 (which is the sorts of +5's that most players are used to dealing with for combat skills). Without extensive testing using high end statistical methods you just won't be able to tell the difference between an 80 and an 85, and even if you desire to do those tests you'll probably never have a character that can get to the point of being able to perform them.

Within the game those small cap increases just don't matter. You could replace them with a placebo and no one would ever know.

That said, I am in favor of making clans distinct in their specialties through code, it's just that this particular method wouldn't work to do that.

[Grogerif]

Scenario B: Staff gets lazy and just claims that they increased the cap for certain clans without actually doing it.

100% behind. Everybody in the clan would train that skill harder then any other, convinced of their gains.  Thus leading the clan to be better at the skill.

[Brokkr]

Muhahaha.*

*You've been warned.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Muhahaha.*

*You've been warned.

With no reference, I don't like this post. Clarify yourself! LOL

No, seriously, sorry guys. I'm posting this from work. I haven't had time to contribute. Sorry. ASAP,  I'll be in here.

[Barsook]

I don't know if this was said but is the request for coded bonuses via code a way to help causal clanned players? Either way, I still I'm not the boat of the idea and would rather see specialization and rotation of clans.