Clan bonuses via code?

[Armaddict]

The other ideas are inferior in the opinion of others, who are flat out resisting it.

Uh...they were flat out resisted?  Where?

If we all agree that the idea of Joan of Arc getting +5 to slashing is stupid [it is, you glossed over that "Oh she wouldn't get it as the top leader," when every other post by mansa et all describes that she would with this system]

I did the opposite of glossing over it.  I directly addressed it.  But if you want it far more in depth...

Under the proposed system, she wouldn't get bonuses, specifically because she is the equivalent of a character that came fresh from chargen with no military background to lead armies...with a banner, not with a sword, as you said.  In other words, she didn't even exist in the French Army clan environment prior to that.  That character isn't played in Arm, at least not in anywhere close to a consistent basis enough for it to even be an issue.  We specifically set parameters based around it not being something that recruits can just pick up.  It's once you're immersed in the clan, have been in the clan, and thus came the discussion of ranks, since most clans have some system of cadethood or a recruit status that is specifically for people who are new, not embedded, and still being evaluated.

But during that recruit period, they are simultaneously being exposed.  Virtually, in character, and sometimes out of character via clan boards, that character is being given their standards of operation.  Hence...sweet, they become embedded as 'part' of this, and they get what that group does.  As stated before...it's about bringing the environment into the game reality. 

You all keep talking about "real war." In real war, only a small percentage of soldiers are capable of killing a large percentage of people. People always glorify Marines training, or whatever, but it's just a myth when it comes to individual outcomes. I want to be able to play a character like Joker in Full Metal Jacket and mostly suck. I actually played a character like that and got a lot of kudos. Getting "+10 to badassery" wouldn't be funny or help roleplay or do anything good if you want to play something like a true to life concept.

The flexible karma based perk is better in this situation. To use Joker from Full Metal Jacket, maybe I just want a perk that gives me +15 to tool making so I can make weird patches and shit for my helmet. Other people can get their +10 to ranged combat or whatever. Allow people to realize their concepts; it's better than homogeneity.

I must be missing where you're talking about.  I didn't talk about 'real war', but I did use real life examples to try and share congruent thinking.  But I can also say that you're making it out, once again, like what's being talked about is a jump from novice to master the moment you join a clan.  People will still suck.  You can still skip training and keep sucking.  No one is giving a recipe for anything like what you keep implying would happen.

But they'd be a little better at it than if they'd continued being an indy, oblivious to how that unit or group did things.  They'd be a little better at it than they were before being surrounded constantly by people doing it that way right in front of them.  This doesn't eliminate, box in, or destroy roles.  It doesn't change decisions your character is able to make.  It doesn't modify what roles are available to you.  I don't know what makes you think that my warrior 'rinther will no longer pursue being in the guild because sneaky guilders are very sneaky and I'm not sneaky.  That's weird.

The flexible karma based perk is better in this situation. To use Joker from Full Metal Jacket, maybe I just want a perk that gives me +15 to tool making so I can make weird patches and shit for my helmet. Other people can get their +10 to ranged combat or whatever. Allow people to realize their concepts; it's better than homogeneity.

This statement comes from the same implication.  You're saying it's -better- to give bonuses based off of 0 in-game action than it is to acknowledge what is generally at least a year of in-game interaction.  And you're saying that clans being good at doing things makes it so that no one in that clan can ever do their own thing again.  But that isn't the way the code works.  That isn't the way the game works.  And that isn't the way the vast majority of our playerbase works.  You keep falling back to this point despite multiple statements of how it has little bearing, if any, on what's being discussed.

Likewise, while the perk system is a cool idea, as noted, it has nothing to do with clan benefits, and the poster of it said he didn't think clans needed clan benefits, and that was that.  If you want to make a perk system for clans, then we can extend that idea further.  If you don't want it for clans, then it's in...a different thread.

think phalanxes

Exactly.  Think phalanxes.

And yes, it is a game still, and needs to be playable, so maybe add a mechanism to help training and other pain points, but don't add weird stat and skill effects. I might start imagining showers of sparks when I know someone has +10 to dodge, because the mechanism is identical to a tacky MOBA or MMORPG and they love glittery sparks there.

Everyone talking about it in a positive way is pretty clearly not talking about gaminess.  You keep on positing that that's what it is.  The reality is that we're discussing code.  The same code that makes it so that when you wear this armor, your defense goes up.  When you hold this tool, you are suddenly better at weaponcrafting.  When you wear these sunslits, you don't get lost as easily.  These are known as mechanics, and they can be thought of as gamey if you like, but they are the way that we use code to influence the game world to its own reality.  They do not eliminate the stage you speak of, nor prevent the use of certain props.  Code is the ropes and pulleys that move the props around the stage to make them display what you want displayed.  Code is what makes it so that a staffer doesn't need to be there, influencing each and every thing in the game since we have chosen a system that is not free-form; you don't get to just emote something and have it be real.

The code we have is simultaneously one of the biggest draws of Armageddon and one of its setbacks.  Because of how it's been created, no amount of pure roleplay brings about the influence you want, because code must be shifted to show it.  Yet it also makes the world alive, dynamic, and acting on its own, not just a stage but a -living- stage.  Your view that code is gamey and detracts from the stage pretty much flies in the face of the game you already play.

SPECIFICALLY:  I like Delerium's idea.  I'm sorry I didn't specifically make a post to say +1 to something that I had no issues with and was vibing with other people who had posted before me.  I do not think it is the only solution, as every solution will have pros and cons.  Every single one.  I accept cons about each proposal...but I do not accept fabricated cons that aren't real or come from a place that smells like absurdity.

[Armaddict]

Clan perks should still color inside the box.

I can't even color lines.

Joking aside, can you elaborate more on what that means?  Or is this a fun post?

[Veselka]

Hmm. There are a lot of interesting ideas in this thread. To me it boils down to 'the box' for a PC being difficult to overcome after X amount of days played. You realize, through character development, that it'd be cool if they could pick up instrument making, or skinning, or sword making at a low cap, because it suits the character. Instead, they have to explain why they (for the life of them) can never and will never develop that craft.

Conversely, it seems combat skills are also being discussed, which is a complex equation. Basically, should elite/high-end units or PCs in that unit have access to higher caps in combat, cool special moves, or the like.

Part of me wishes that ArmageddonMUD had room for this kind of thing, but as it is currently built, I don't really think it does. Group combat on a whole is nightmarish in quality, 1v1 combat is pretty boring (with the exception of added new non-passive skills like riposte and hack). The only time combat is truly brutal is when one very skilled opponent fights another very not-skilled opponent, and that leads to assured quick death for the latter party. There's some wiggle room inside of this -- things like backstab and sap, which have woefully long timers to balance them out.

Like...I never really played Armageddon to chop up motherfuckerz with swordz, and when I do want to get those jollies, it's typically against Gith NPCs instead of other PCs. I truly get my jollies in the plots, which yes, do lead to PK from time to time (or all the time depending on the PC), but it's the story, not the skills, that I think the game does the best.

There's obviously room for improvement, mainly in making classes non-linear, which is not a system that Staff seems to want to go to (judging from recent comments from Brokkr as an example of not wanting to move to a skill based system, like https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,56311.msg1054131.html#msg1054131 and https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,56290.msg1053846.html#msg1053846).

Barring a skill-based point buy system, where skill points might become available after X amount of days played or X skill level is reached in another related skill, the classes will remain flat. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just means once you sort of figure out what class another PC is, it changes how you approach fighting them (or it can, in theory, even subconsciously.)

Similar to the mage full elementalist guild revamp, where the focus changed from them being a glass cannon to real people, a skill buy system or something akin to it would change our perceptions of PCs as a Class, so PC 1 is definitely a Stalker, while PC 2 is definitely a Soldier. It would be a mash up of skills based on that PC's background and interests that would dictate their limitations and goals and progress.

So...In essence...Without a skill-buy system, we have what we have, classes with predictable flat skill-trees and branching capabilities. That isn't terrible. We can choose subguilds to better round out that character's focuses, and that certainly changes a class and their capabilities. A Soldier who chooses Slipknife will be drastically different from a Soldier who chooses Master Weaponsmith.

[Armaddict]

Same boat as other (not bad) ideas presented, Veselka.  This has a lot less to do with character customization, and a lot more to do with clan identities being realizable in-game.  In other words, to make clans act in the way they are described in play and documentation.

If you read it as 'join this clan to be better at this', then it's the wrong framing and we're specifically trying to avoid that (i.e. The only real criticism I have of Delerium's idea is that it's more viable to clan hop for character progression) approach being rewarded.  Instead, it's about some action or change we can make that makes clans 'stick out' in the ways we say they do, as naturally as possible.

We need another thread for character customization ideas since people have a lot of those.  There have been more than a few over the years but I don't believe recently.

[Veselka]

Same boat as other (not bad) ideas presented, Veselka.  This has a lot less to do with character customization, and a lot more to do with clan identities being realizable in-game.  In other words, to make clans act in the way they are described in play and documentation.

If you read it as 'join this clan to be better at this', then it's the wrong framing and we're specifically trying to avoid that (i.e. The only real criticism I have of Delerium's idea is that it's more viable to clan hop for character progression) approach being rewarded.  Instead, it's about some action or change we can make that makes clans 'stick out' in the ways we say they do, as naturally as possible.

We need another thread for character customization ideas since people have a lot of those.  There have been more than a few over the years but I don't believe recently.

Fair point -- I suppose without many options to choose from, though, the ability to make Houses like Tor or Oash stand out from one another is limited.

So -- Without unique skills available to be applied to those clans, i'm at a loss of how to make them stand out. A higher cap to Riposte doesn't really wet my whistle or necessarily make sense.

NPC trainers might be possible? But that would only be within the context of The Grind. It circles back to the concept that Shadow Artists paled in combat to similarly days-played hunters, mostly because in the Hunters' grind, they constantly fought animals for Dem Gains.

It's complex, i'm not sure if there are simple answers (or even complex answers) to solve the esoteric things being discussed. I'm not sure skill gains/boons are the answer, or lower caps for those not in clans. Without more unique skills...Things like 'critical strike' or Jihaen pressure points or bulwark (shield wall with other people), the +/- of offensive skills versus defensive skills will plateau as it always has.

[Armaddict]

Same boat as other (not bad) ideas presented, Veselka.  This has a lot less to do with character customization, and a lot more to do with clan identities being realizable in-game.  In other words, to make clans act in the way they are described in play and documentation.

If you read it as 'join this clan to be better at this', then it's the wrong framing and we're specifically trying to avoid that (i.e. The only real criticism I have of Delerium's idea is that it's more viable to clan hop for character progression) approach being rewarded.  Instead, it's about some action or change we can make that makes clans 'stick out' in the ways we say they do, as naturally as possible.

We need another thread for character customization ideas since people have a lot of those.  There have been more than a few over the years but I don't believe recently.

Fair point -- I suppose without many options to choose from, though, the ability to make Houses like Tor or Oash stand out from one another is limited.

So -- Without unique skills available to be applied to those clans, i'm at a loss of how to make them stand out. A higher cap to Riposte doesn't really wet my whistle or necessarily make sense.

NPC trainers might be possible? But that would only be within the context of The Grind. It circles back to the concept that Shadow Artists paled in combat to similarly days-played hunters, mostly because in the Hunters' grind, they constantly fought animals for Dem Gains.

It's complex, i'm not sure if there are simple answers (or even complex answers) to solve the esoteric things being discussed. I'm not sure skill gains/boons are the answer, or lower caps for those not in clans. Without more unique skills...Things like 'critical strike' or Jihaen pressure points or bulwark (shield wall with other people), the +/- of offensive skills versus defensive skills will plateau as it always has.

As discussed by people in discord, it's actually a pretty weird awkward mix of problems that there just may not be a direct solution to.  As with most coded-nature things, there's kind of a cascade of 'If we do this, we need to do this, which means we need to do this...' all the way down.

Clearly, people want more character customization options as well, still. 

[triste]

there's kind of a cascade of 'If we do this, we need to do this, which means we need to do this...' all the way down.

This is why people who are (A) coders and/or (B) good roleplayers resist the idea.

I was drawn to this game as an RPI, but sometimes it feels like there is no room for the RP.

[triste]

I said about three times here, "If you extrapolate and look at the implications of what you're asking for, there are problems." And now you've just posted triumphantly, "we've extrapolated and seen that there are problems!"

I'm out, I'm really out this time. I love you all and trust you to arrive at good conclusions. I'll see what's changed next time I check this out, hopefully catch some awesome stuff from (primarily) independent PCs like Kukuali and Sharper Still as mentioned in that other thread, etc. Don't extinguish the brightest sparks among you.

[Armaddict]

his is why people who are (A) coders and/or (B) good roleplayers resist the idea.

I was drawn to this game as an RPI, but sometimes it feels like there is no room for the RP.

I am both a coder and a good roleplayer, thank you very much.  If you think there is no room for RP in Armageddon, then I'm afraid you've chosen the wrong game.  The RP here is excellent.  Premium.  By far the best I've found that isn't 100% freeform story-mode, where emotes are the only interaction with anything in any manner.  If it isn't cutting it for you, then I think you might just be looking for one of those places that has little to no code support, but that's what holds a lot of people here, even for all its nuances and faults.

I said about three times here, "If you extrapolate and look at the implications of what you're asking for, there are problems." And now you've just posted triumphantly, "we've extrapolated and seen that there are problems!"

Let's re-examine that statement that you've used as some sort of walkback from me, because it's not.

As discussed by people in discord, it's actually a pretty weird awkward mix of problems that there just may not be a direct solution to.

'Not a direct solution'.  A mix of various problems, such as how group combat works, such as how training works, such as how clans are written, such as interactions between houses...

That in no way shape or form says it's a bad idea, or unnecessary, or a waste of time.  It means that the desire or problem still exists, and there is all sorts of discussion to be had about how things work all the way down and how it impacts what's above it.  What things can be addressed, which things cannot.  What ideas would require a complete overhaul, and what items would be relatively low impact for whatever gain it made.  There are pros and cons to every implementation, including no implementation. 

This particular idea does not impede RP.  It does not imbalance the game with proper implementation.
It does address a particular area of a convoluted set of issues.  It does not address all of them.  Neither does any other idea.  Doing nothing says just let the issues remain issues, which is the chosen preference for some.

I'll see what's changed next time I check this out, hopefully catch some awesome stuff from (primarily) independent PCs like Kukuali and Sharper Still as mentioned in that other thread, etc. Don't extinguish the brightest sparks among you.

I'm overwhelmingly curious why the emphasis on independents.  If you don't like clans much that's well and good, because then working on clans and giving them marks of identity or filling holes left by the code-to-gameworld interaction will likely have little impact on you at all.  The brightest sparks among us are never in clans?  THIS EXTINGUISHES SPARKS?!

[triste]

Alright, maybe your arguments don't extinguish the brightest lights among you, because your arguments are laughable and are making me laugh.

If you don't like clans much that's well and good, because then working on clans and giving them marks of identity or filling holes left by the code-to-gameworld interaction will likely have little impact on you at all.

You're arguing for an economy with Sheeple and Meeples and saying that by giving all Sheeple $1000 (it's free money) and giving the Meeples $0 that the Meeple are "unaffected" because they didn't get anything. Uh, they're obviously affected -- you just made every Meeple $1000 poorer relative to every Sheeple.

Again, if you want to bludgeon good players over the head with your arguments, and then make laughable and mathematically illogical arguments like that, you're going to lose good players.

[triste]

And listen, sorry I keep mentioning roleplay, I'm not just saying "roleplay" and dropping it to assume the high ground. That would be lame. I am also consistently the only person here speaking in terms of roleplay scenarios since the start of this debate.

You asked why I mentioned Kukuali et al. Well. I can't speak for her, but let me give you an anecdote. Again, I met her on my first long lived character after returning from a three year break of Armageddon. She taught me a lot. One anecdote from her that stuck with me was this. She told my character she couldn't ride to my character's homeland [the salt flats, I had a fun salt flats tribe independently before the Two Moons existed]. Kukuali said as soon as she rides near the Salt Flats, a Templar or one of their servants would likely whisk her right into the Arena by some Whiran curse. And the Arena would of course be inescapable, she would have to fight and die. So sorry, you cute semi-noob returning to the game, I can't see your PC's homeland. I remember hearing this and thinking, OOCly, "That's OP, not necessarily good roleplay, and kind of silly, but fits the setting I guess."

And since returning to play this game, I've noticed if you play anything that's not a Bynner or Militia member or Templar, the odds are comically stacked against you. I've had a member of the Crimson Wind killed directly by a Templar with about four hours played under her belt. When you roleplay through a risky scene with your fellow Crimson Wind and die for it at 4 hours played, with novice parry, to a mon level fireball, you might think, OOCly, "That's OP, not necessarily good roleplay, and kind of silly, but fits the setting I guess."

When you play a city elf merchant, who doesn't have an in game tribe because none exist, you find out that your earning capacity is limited by how much you can carry and how strong the lock on your apartment is. You will be a crafty independent elf and be proud to make a large in a day. You then learn that the average human Salarri crafter can make ten large a day because they have infinite free and secure storage and special clan locked recipes. You despair, knowing these Houses in Allanak never hire non-human crafters, and think, OOCly, "That's OP, not necessarily good roleplay, and kind of silly, but fits the setting I guess."

But then you have an epiphany: half of these scenarios do not fit the setting. Why does a Templar ride out unattended by guards to kill and cast magick on a raider on their own? I feel like it's outrageous for figures of such stature to do that. Why does it make sense for a bumbling novice crafter at Salarr to instantly have more earning power than even the most skilled elven merchant? It doesn't. The game isn't broken, but the game is already severely imbalanced and stacked against certain concepts, and here I see a thread, "Please give more bonuses to these already over powered groups." Yeah, no. You can't tell me what to think about all of these scenarios after what I've seen.

All of these stories are from more than a year ago. I only felt comfortable talking about Kukuali because she opened the door to talking about her character first a while ago. And again. God damn I love powerful indies who shake up the game, it's an uphill battle and she worked on her plots for years.

You try your darndest to care about roleplay. You see a thread like this and are consistently the only person to provide good anecdotes about roleplay, because you care about roleplay. You get kudos for playing thankless characters, but always take a beating and suffer. And then, when you try to fight and advocate for good roleplay, you have some other guy posting just as much as you smugly say, "this isn't the game for you."

[Aruven]

Do ya'll deal with this on the discord also? 🤣🤣

[triste]

I'm not in the discord. I'm too busy for this stuff generally. I just want to be sure that players who would be directly harmed by this change would still have a chance to enjoy the game.

Show some respect, perhaps.

[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.

Locked.